Let's do it, folks! I just submitted one—short and sweet:
I oppose the proposal to increase the number of federal workers who are political appointees. A small number of political appointees makes sense, but we certainly do not need more. A professionalized, nonpartisan civil service is essential for ensuring that programs and policies are developed and implemented effectively for all Americans. A politicized federal civil service would result in more instability and less effectiveness. I have served under Republican and Democratic administrations, and while priorities can and do shift with a change of administration, the essential work of the government continues and requires, above all, the steady public service of nonpartisan experts.
The current method of civil service employment is the best guarantee of a committed, non-partisan workforce that holds deep memory of agency history. To alter this practice defeats this merit-based employment. Difficulty in getting rid of employees that are disliked by their supervisor - for whatever reason - is a feature, not a bug.
The citizens of this country are ruled by laws, not the whimsy of agency heads or political leaders. When career civil servants are replaced by partisan loyalists, the public can no longer trust that their employees - for they are MY employees, not the Executive Branch's - will act in the best interest of the citizenry.
This change should not be implemented. It will ruin the already tenuous morale of the Federal workforce. It will cost the government serious, committed employees at a time when agencies are already struggling to fulfill their mandated services. They will leave, and they will be dearly missed.
The Federal government is not a business; it is not supposed to make money. It is meant to provide services to the citizenry. Let them do their jobs.
Just left an anonymous comment. Under any other administration I probably would’ve given my name, but not this one. Thank you for telling us how to do this.
In the document you shared that describes the details of the rule, it explicitly states: "All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or RIN for this
rulemaking". It would be helpful if you could provide that detail to ensure the comments fulfill the requirements and to make sure it is directed at the right agency.
from the link where he says "submit a comment HERE", i think it associates the right information automatically, but I scrolled down and also saw it below and pasted in just in case here it is for others: Office of Personnel Management
This is really helpful. In a time when so much feels uncertain, it’s good to be reminded that we still have tools available — and that enforcing existing transparency laws can make a real difference. I appreciate the clear, practical steps. It’s empowering to know there are ways to stay engaged and hold systems accountable.
thanks for publicizing!! the deadline extended until June 7. looking thru comments (there are thousands) most oppose the change so I imagine the trumpsters are working to increase supportive comments. Keep the opposition up! Here's a good one.
As a civil SERVANT I took an oath to the constitution NOT to a political party.
I am writing to express strong opposition to any effort to reinstate Schedule F in the federal workforce. This proposal undermines foundational principles of merit-based civil service, invites undue political interference, and risks violating statutory and constitutional protections.
1. Undermines Merit System Protections
Schedule F represents a sweeping change to the civil service system that bypasses the competitive hiring process and allows for the removal of career professionals without cause. This contravenes the intent of the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act and longstanding statutory protections under Title 5 of the U.S. Code, which are designed to ensure that federal employment decisions are based on merit, not politics.
2. Weakens Due Process and Employee Rights
Federal employees in competitive service positions have a constitutionally recognized expectation of due process before being removed. Reassigning them to Schedule F without cause strips them of these protections, potentially violating the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The Supreme Court has affirmed that such employment can create a property interest (see Loudermill, 1985), which cannot be taken away arbitrarily.
3. Politicizes the Career Civil Service
Schedule F blurs the line between career professionals and political appointees. It risks creating a chilling effect in which federal employees may feel pressured to align with political views rather than carry out their duties objectively and in the public interest. This contradicts the spirit of the Hatch Act, which aims to preserve a nonpartisan civil service.
4. Violates the Administrative Procedure Act
The prior attempt to implement Schedule F was done with minimal transparency and justification. Reinstating it without a clear, evidence-based rationale may once again run afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which requires agencies to avoid arbitrary and capricious decision-making. The APA also requires agencies to consider the reliance interests of employees and the public trust.
5. Threatens Continuity of Government
Schedule F could lead to widespread firings and resignations of experienced public servants, jeopardizing the continuity and institutional knowledge necessary for effective governance—particularly during transitions of power or national emergencies.
Conclusion
The civil service exists to serve the American people, not any political party or administration. Schedule F threatens to erode that foundation. I urge the Administration and the Office of Personnel Management to reject any move to reinstate this classification and to uphold the integrity, independence, and professionalism of the federal workforce.
Let's do it, folks! I just submitted one—short and sweet:
I oppose the proposal to increase the number of federal workers who are political appointees. A small number of political appointees makes sense, but we certainly do not need more. A professionalized, nonpartisan civil service is essential for ensuring that programs and policies are developed and implemented effectively for all Americans. A politicized federal civil service would result in more instability and less effectiveness. I have served under Republican and Democratic administrations, and while priorities can and do shift with a change of administration, the essential work of the government continues and requires, above all, the steady public service of nonpartisan experts.
Thanks for taking the lead, Rachael. I just chimed in, as well.
Thanks for sharing your comment, Rachel.
Thanks so much for this, will be sharing widely!
My comment:
The current method of civil service employment is the best guarantee of a committed, non-partisan workforce that holds deep memory of agency history. To alter this practice defeats this merit-based employment. Difficulty in getting rid of employees that are disliked by their supervisor - for whatever reason - is a feature, not a bug.
The citizens of this country are ruled by laws, not the whimsy of agency heads or political leaders. When career civil servants are replaced by partisan loyalists, the public can no longer trust that their employees - for they are MY employees, not the Executive Branch's - will act in the best interest of the citizenry.
This change should not be implemented. It will ruin the already tenuous morale of the Federal workforce. It will cost the government serious, committed employees at a time when agencies are already struggling to fulfill their mandated services. They will leave, and they will be dearly missed.
The Federal government is not a business; it is not supposed to make money. It is meant to provide services to the citizenry. Let them do their jobs.
Just left an anonymous comment. Under any other administration I probably would’ve given my name, but not this one. Thank you for telling us how to do this.
How did you submit a comment anonymously? I "Leave a comment here" link took me to a page where name was required.
In the document you shared that describes the details of the rule, it explicitly states: "All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or RIN for this
rulemaking". It would be helpful if you could provide that detail to ensure the comments fulfill the requirements and to make sure it is directed at the right agency.
from the link where he says "submit a comment HERE", i think it associates the right information automatically, but I scrolled down and also saw it below and pasted in just in case here it is for others: Office of Personnel Management
5 CFR Parts 210, 212, 213, 302, 432, 451, and 752
[Docket ID: OPM-2025-0004]
RIN 3206-AO80
This is really helpful. In a time when so much feels uncertain, it’s good to be reminded that we still have tools available — and that enforcing existing transparency laws can make a real difference. I appreciate the clear, practical steps. It’s empowering to know there are ways to stay engaged and hold systems accountable.
Thank you for making this action item easy! Thank you for your amazing coverage on so many different topics!
Thanks Don, this is the guidance we need. I will share with my friends and family
Please update this post — comments now may be accepted through June 7
https://www.regulations.gov/document/OPM-2025-0004-0001/comment?sortBy=postedDate&sortDirection=desc
thanks for publicizing!! the deadline extended until June 7. looking thru comments (there are thousands) most oppose the change so I imagine the trumpsters are working to increase supportive comments. Keep the opposition up! Here's a good one.
As a civil SERVANT I took an oath to the constitution NOT to a political party.
I am writing to express strong opposition to any effort to reinstate Schedule F in the federal workforce. This proposal undermines foundational principles of merit-based civil service, invites undue political interference, and risks violating statutory and constitutional protections.
1. Undermines Merit System Protections
Schedule F represents a sweeping change to the civil service system that bypasses the competitive hiring process and allows for the removal of career professionals without cause. This contravenes the intent of the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act and longstanding statutory protections under Title 5 of the U.S. Code, which are designed to ensure that federal employment decisions are based on merit, not politics.
2. Weakens Due Process and Employee Rights
Federal employees in competitive service positions have a constitutionally recognized expectation of due process before being removed. Reassigning them to Schedule F without cause strips them of these protections, potentially violating the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The Supreme Court has affirmed that such employment can create a property interest (see Loudermill, 1985), which cannot be taken away arbitrarily.
3. Politicizes the Career Civil Service
Schedule F blurs the line between career professionals and political appointees. It risks creating a chilling effect in which federal employees may feel pressured to align with political views rather than carry out their duties objectively and in the public interest. This contradicts the spirit of the Hatch Act, which aims to preserve a nonpartisan civil service.
4. Violates the Administrative Procedure Act
The prior attempt to implement Schedule F was done with minimal transparency and justification. Reinstating it without a clear, evidence-based rationale may once again run afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which requires agencies to avoid arbitrary and capricious decision-making. The APA also requires agencies to consider the reliance interests of employees and the public trust.
5. Threatens Continuity of Government
Schedule F could lead to widespread firings and resignations of experienced public servants, jeopardizing the continuity and institutional knowledge necessary for effective governance—particularly during transitions of power or national emergencies.
Conclusion
The civil service exists to serve the American people, not any political party or administration. Schedule F threatens to erode that foundation. I urge the Administration and the Office of Personnel Management to reject any move to reinstate this classification and to uphold the integrity, independence, and professionalism of the federal workforce.
Good news! 27k comments already, and the time for submission has been extended! Now June 7:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/05/23/2025-09356/improving-performance-accountability-and-responsiveness-in-the-civil-service
As a onetime VA employee I also submitted.
Thank you! just submitted my public comment.
Done. Thanks~!
Thanks for this post - I just submitted a comment!
Done!✅