07-23-2025

Creating Schedule G in the Excepted Service

Executive OrderView the Original .pdf
View the Original .pdf

The 1-Minute Brief

What: Executive Order 14317 creates a new category of federal civil service employment called "Schedule G." This category is for noncareer employees in positions deemed to be "policy-making or policy-advocating" and who are expected to leave their jobs after a presidential transition. These employees would not have the same job protections as career civil servants, making them easier to hire and fire by an administration.

Money: As an executive order, there is no official Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score. The order states that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will bear the costs of publishing the order. Implementation will have administrative costs for OPM to write new regulations and for federal agencies to identify and reclassify positions.

Your Impact: For the average American, the direct, immediate impact is minimal. However, the indirect effects could be significant over time. The order is intended to make government agencies more responsive to the President's agenda, which could speed up the implementation of policies. Critics argue it could also lead to instability, a loss of expert knowledge in government, and decision-making based more on political loyalty than on impartial analysis, potentially affecting everything from food safety inspections to national security.

Status: Issued by the President on July 17, 2025.

What's Actually in the Bill

This executive order amends federal civil service rules to create a new employment classification, fundamentally altering the employment status of certain federal workers. It is designed to give the President more direct control over the personnel in policy-related roles.

Core Provisions:

  • Creates Schedule G: The order establishes "Schedule G" within the "excepted service" for employees in "policy-making or policy-advocating" positions.
  • Tied to Presidential Transitions: These positions are defined as those "normally subject to change as a result of a Presidential transition," meaning the employees are expected to resign when a new President takes office.
  • Removes Job Protections: The order explicitly states that standard Civil Service rules and regulations regarding removal from a position do not apply to employees in Schedule G.
  • Directs OPM Implementation: The Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is required to develop and adopt regulations to implement the order.
  • Hiring Criteria: For the Department of Veterans Affairs, the order specifies that the Secretary shall consider whether appointees would be "suitable exponents of the President's policies" but explicitly forbids taking political affiliation or activity into account.

Stated Purpose (from the Sponsors):

The order states its purpose is to address a gap in existing civil service schedules and to improve the operations of the government, with a specific mention of the Department of Veterans Affairs. It argues that since schedules already exist for noncareer policy-determining staff (Schedule C) and career policy-making staff (Schedule Policy/Career), a schedule is needed for noncareer policy-making and policy-advocating staff.

Key Facts:

Affected Sectors: All federal government agencies, with the Department of Veterans Affairs being the only agency explicitly mentioned in the implementation section.
Timeline: The order was signed on July 17, 2025, and is effective immediately. OPM is directed to create implementing regulations promptly.
Scope: While the exact number is unknown, the scope is expected to be broad, potentially covering tens of thousands of federal employees who are deemed to be in policy-influencing roles.

The Backstory: How We Got Here

Timeline of Events:

The Merit-Based System (1883 - 2020):

For over a century, the U.S. has operated under a merit-based civil service system, established by the Pendleton Act of 1883 to end the "spoils system" where government jobs were handed out based on political loyalty. This system was designed to ensure a professional, non-partisan workforce that could serve the public regardless of which political party was in power. The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 modernized this system, creating the framework and protections that govern the federal workforce today.

The "Schedule F" Precedent (2020 - 2024):

In October 2020, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13957 to create "Schedule F," a new classification for policy-related employees that would have stripped them of their job protections. The stated goal was to increase accountability and make it easier to remove federal employees who were seen as obstructing the president's agenda. The order was rescinded by President Joe Biden in January 2021 before it was fully implemented. In response to the Schedule F effort, the Biden administration's OPM finalized a rule in April 2024 designed to make it more difficult for any future administration to reclassify career employees and strip their protections.

Why Now? The Political Calculus:

  • Executive Authority: This executive order represents a reassertion of a "unitary executive theory," which posits that the President has broad authority over the executive branch, including its personnel.
  • Overcoming Roadblocks: The order is a direct response to the OPM rule from 2024. By creating "Schedule G," the administration is attempting to work around the new protections and re-establish a mechanism to ensure policy roles are filled by individuals aligned with the President's agenda.
  • Fulfilling a Promise: The move delivers on a long-standing promise to increase accountability within the federal bureaucracy, often criticized by supporters as a "deep state" resistant to change.

Your Real-World Impact

The Direct Answer: This directly affects thousands of federal employees in policy roles and indirectly affects every American who relies on the consistent, non-partisan functioning of government agencies.

What Could Change for You:

Potential Benefits:

  • Government Responsiveness: Proponents argue that by aligning policy staff with the President's vision, the government can implement the agenda of the elected administration more quickly and effectively.
  • Increased Accountability: This could make it easier to remove federal employees who are genuinely underperforming in critical policy-related jobs.

Possible Disruptions or Costs:

Short-term (1-2 years):

  • Loss of Expertise: A potential wave of firings and resignations following a presidential transition could lead to a significant loss of institutional knowledge and expertise within federal agencies. This could cause instability and slow down government services.

Long-term:

  • Politicized Services: Critics fear that a politicized civil service could lead to decisions based on loyalty rather than science, data, or law. This could impact the reliability of services like food safety, environmental protection, weather forecasting, and national security intelligence.
  • Erosion of Public Trust: A shift away from a non-partisan civil service could erode public trust, fostering the perception that government agencies are working for a political party instead of the American people.

Who's Most Affected:

Primary Groups: Federal employees in roles involving policy analysis, development, advocacy, and implementation, particularly at the senior levels (GS-13 and above).
Secondary Groups: All citizens and industries that rely on federal agencies for services, regulation, and guidance.
Regional Impact: The Washington, D.C. metropolitan area has the highest concentration of federal employees, but the impact will be felt nationwide, as federal workers live and work in every state.

Bottom Line: This order could make the federal government's policy arm more politically responsive but potentially less stable and reliant on objective expertise.

Where the Parties Stand

Republican Position: "Increase Accountability and Efficiency"

Core Stance: Generally supportive of increasing presidential authority over the federal bureaucracy to ensure the government is responsive to the elected leadership.

Their Arguments:

  • ✓ The current system makes it too difficult to remove poor-performing or politically resistant employees, hindering government efficiency.
  • ✓ A President needs to be able to install people in policy roles who will faithfully execute their agenda.
  • ⚠️ Some conservatives have expressed concern that such a system could be abused and devolve into a political spoils system if not carefully implemented.

Legislative Strategy: Using executive orders to enact this change is the primary strategy. Supporters would defend the order against legal challenges and advocate for its necessity in making government more accountable.

Democratic Position: "Protect Our Non-Partisan Civil Service"

Core Stance: Strongly opposed to actions that are seen as politicizing the federal workforce and undermining the merit-based system.

Their Arguments:

  • ✓ A professional, non-partisan civil service ensures that laws are applied equally and that government services are reliable, regardless of who is in power.
  • ✗ This order is a return to the 19th-century "spoils system," which was rife with corruption and incompetence.
  • ✗ It will drain the federal government of invaluable expertise and institutional knowledge, making it less effective and less safe.

Legislative Strategy: Oppose the executive order and support legislation to protect the civil service. In the past, Democrats have introduced the "Saving the Civil Service Act" to codify protections and prevent classifications like Schedule F or G.

Constitutional Check

The Verdict: ⚠️ Questionable

Basis of Authority:

The President cites Article II of the U.S. Constitution (the Vesting Clause, which grants "the executive Power" to the President) and specific statutes in Title 5 of the U.S. Code governing the civil service.

U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 1: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."

Constitutional Implications:

Unitary Executive Theory: The order rests on a broad interpretation of presidential power, arguing the President must have control over the personnel executing the laws.
Congressional Authority: Opponents argue that while the President is the head of the executive branch, Congress has the constitutional authority to establish and structure federal agencies and offices, including setting the terms of employment and providing job protections.
Precedent: The Supreme Court has upheld the independence of certain federal agencies and placed limits on the President's power to remove some officials, meaning this authority is not absolute.

Potential Legal Challenges:

Legal challenges are almost certain. Federal employee unions, such as the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), and good-government advocacy groups are expected to file lawsuits. They will likely argue that the executive order exceeds the President's statutory authority, violates the intent of the Civil Service Reform Act, and unlawfully bypasses the regulatory protections finalized by OPM in 2024.

Your Action Options

TO SUPPORT THIS BILL

5-Minute Actions:

  • Call Your Rep/Senators: Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121. "I'm a constituent from [Your City/Town] and I support Executive Order 14317 to increase accountability in the federal government. I urge [Rep./Sen. Name] to support the President's efforts to reform the civil service."

30-Minute Deep Dive:

  • Research Supporting Views: Read analysis from organizations that advocate for greater executive branch efficiency and accountability, such as the Manhattan Institute or commentators who have written in support of Schedule F-style reforms.
  • Write a Letter to the Editor: Submit an opinion piece to your local newspaper arguing that the executive order is a necessary step to make the government more responsive to the will of the voters.

TO OPPOSE THIS BILL

5-Minute Actions:

  • Call Your Rep/Senators: Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121. "I'm a constituent from [Your City/Town] and I urge [Rep./Sen. Name] to oppose Executive Order 14317 and protect the non-partisan civil service by supporting legislation like the Saving the Civil Service Act."

30-Minute Deep Dive:

  • Write a Detailed Email: Contact your representatives and members of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, which oversee the federal workforce.
  • Join an Organization: Support or join advocacy groups working to protect the civil service, such as:
    • National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE)
    • Union of Concerned Scientists
    • Protect Democracy
    • Partnership for Public Service