One form of disinformation is the “look over there, not over here” narrative, especially when used to scapegoat a person or a population. We are currently hearing a version of this narrative in the form of an attack on federal employees who are being portrayed as representative of government bloat or corruption.
Yet let’s look at why we have federal employees:
Who works to ensure the safety of our food and water? Federal employees.
Who helps to ensure the safety of our medicines and works to keep their costs down? Federal employees.
Who helps rescue and care for us after disasters? Federal employees.
Who protects us at home and abroad? Federal employees.
Who ensures that the planes in which we travel land safely? Federal employees.
Who cares for our veterans? Federal employees.
Who tracks spending to ensure states and contractors use funds appropriately? Federal employees.
Who processes and sends out checks for Social Security or administers key programs like Medicare? Federal employees.
Federal employees do all of the above while following a strict code of ethics.
When you see a narrative that involves scapegoating, ask the following questions: Who is pushing this narrative and how does it benefit them? What is this narrative obscuring? What aren’t we asking? And what do I and other Americans stand to lose if these people are targeted as proposed? In the case of federal workers, we could lose valuable expertise as well as the efficiencies that go with experience and a spirit of stewardship.
When unelected billionaires who have benefited or might benefit from government contracts suggest that federal employees are somehow themselves responsible for bloat in federal budgets simply by virtue of the jobs they hold, those billionaires are undermining those who might hold them accountable. And members of Congress who echo these claims are deflecting attention away from their own role in setting budgets and appropriating money.
Instead of debating the various ideas being floated for randomly cutting the federal work force we might instead ask: How do we ensure that those advising the government are not engaged in self-dealing? What types of rules or processes might better ensure that our representatives focus on the needs of the American people when they spend or appropriate government funds? How might we best identify the core services we need, and deliver those most effectively? What information would best inform those decisions?
As a country we do need to address our deficit and make some hard financial decisions. But if we really want to reduce the deficit and balance the budget, why aren’t we also talking about wealth taxes, or value added taxes, or corporate taxes, or limits on deductions available to those who are already well-off? After all, compensation for federal civilian staffers amounts to a little more than 4% of the federal budget. So even if a significant number were to be laid off, it would not solve our issues with the deficit.
Nor is it clear that the current level of staffing is grossly inefficient. Although federal hiring increased during and after the pandemic, the federal workforce represents only 0.6% of the population, and has been at this level for many years. That is down from a high of 2.5% in 1945 despite a growing population and an increasingly complex economy. Over 70% of those employees are in defense and national security. So we might ask more broadly, where can we cut and where might we save, and how might we generate new revenues?
Misleading, divisive narratives will not help us move forward. Rather than attacking our federal workers, we could instead engage their expertise so that we can work through the hard issues in ways that are well-informed and that avoid unintended and harmful consequences. And we could approach this effort with respect and compassion for those who work for us.
I am thankful for our federal workers and all the ways they help us. I hope you are as well.
Thanksgiving Day, 2024
Leave a Reply