March 5, 2025 • 35 mins
In this episode of One Thing Trump Did, we look at the firings of thousands of federal workers in the name of cost-cutting by the Department of Government Efficiency, which is headed by Elon Musk. Jeremy is joined by USA Today Chief Political Correspondent Phillip Bailey. #OTTD #onethingtrumpdid #Trump #federalworkers #DOGE #Musk #layoffs
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Welcome to One Thing Trump Did, available exclusively on The
Middle podcast feed on Jeremy Hobson. Each week on this podcast,
we're looking at one thing President Trump did, since there
is so much happening, and we're going to try and
break things down in the same rational, nonpartisan, factual way
we do on The Middle. In this episode, our one
thing is the firing of so many federal workers in
(00:38):
the name of cost cutting by the Department of Government Efficiency,
which is headed by Elon Musk. The federal government is
the largest employer in America, with three million civilians on
the payroll. Musk was asked how many employees he's looking
to cut in total.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
We wish to keep everyone who is doing a job
that is essential and that job well. But if the
job is not essential or they're not doing the job well,
debviously should not be on the public peril.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Joining me now is USA Today Chief political correspondent Philip Bailey,
who happens to hold the record for most frequent guest
appearances on the Middle of Phillip, great to have you
on One Thing Trump did.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
Jeremy, how's it going.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
It's going very well. So the first thing that happened
when it comes to these federal workers was that they
got offered a buyout, they could leave, their jobs, would
be paid for the next several months. About seventy five
thousand took that deal, but then the firings began. What
we know so far about how many people have been fired.
Speaker 3 (01:41):
Good questions, Jeah, I mean approximately. I think, like you said,
seventy five thousand federal employees have taken that buyout. I
believe now as the layoffs continue, about one hundred thousand
workers have taken those buyouts or been fired. So I
think about twenty five thousand is where we're sitting at.
And these numbers are going to fluctuate and change because
(02:03):
this is I think the chaos is a part of
the strategy here. I think it's to keep everyone sort
of unsure about what's going on in the Agriculture Department,
what's going on with the VA, what's going on at HUD,
what's going on with the Social Security Administration. Right, So,
we don't have any solid numbers because when you go
on the DOSEE website, even when they post their receipts
(02:25):
of all the windfalls and the cost savings, those change
because there have been some calculating erarors on this. We
have never seen Jeremy this sort of acts or knife
being taken to our federal workforce, particularly at the helm
of the richest man in the world. That's the part
I think we have to keep reminding folks, is that
(02:47):
the President of the United States and the world's richest
man have determined that there's all this waste, fraud and
abuse here. We're going after that. We're cutting folks back,
We're seeing who's efficient, who's not, and everyone's sort of
in the administration at least is keeping a smile on
this and keeping a pretty face towards it. But more
and more you're hearing these federal workers and their unions
speak out and saying I wasn't even given really an
(03:09):
explanation of why. Right, So the number sits about twenty
five thousand, but I think we're in the moment, so
some of this reporting will change day to day. So
whatever number we say here today could be something different.
This second round of major layoffs is coming.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Well, you mentioned the unions. Not all federal workers are
in unions, but do the unions have power to stop
any of the layoffs?
Speaker 3 (03:33):
Well, they have found lawsuits and somewhat successful in that.
You know, it depends on what courts do what, But
I mean, you certainly have seen some of these unions
for federal workers step up and put out series of
press releases and put out lawsuits and try to rally
their employees and initially urging a lot of them to stay,
don't give in, don't give up, don't walk away from
(03:56):
your job. But when it comes to anyone's ability to
stop this, I mean, I think we were seeing what
Donald Trump do here. We haven't really seen a Republican
president take this on to this degree maybe since Ronald
Reagan in about forty something years ago in the nineteen eighties.
So the unions are for the most part powerless. There
hasn't been any conversation about a strike. There hasn't been
any conversation about a work stoppag which you'll probably honestly
(04:19):
feed into with Donald Trump and Elon Musk want right,
is the further show an underscore. I look all these
folks who want to sort of sit at home and
not do their job and now protest or boycott. So
I have a sense that when we are talking about
this federal workforce and the changes that it's undergoing in
this sort of anxiety. A lot of these federal workers, who,
(04:39):
by the way, are getting these pink slips on a
Friday afternoon, and many of them are still in their
probationary status, and there's still a legal question of that
in the courts right out of Northern California, with the
judge there putting a halt to some of the probationary
workers being laid off. I don't think we're gonna get
a full answer for the next couple of weeks, as
the union and other opponents of Donald Trump's figure out
(05:03):
what's the best strategy. The courts have had some limited
aspects here, like again the buyout was paused and then
it was allowed to go forward. I think the many
folks in the opposition of Donald Trump would think that
these court rulings can do something. But from what I'm seeing, Jeremy,
from my vantage point, the unions are trying their mightiest,
But ultimately this president is testing his authority and first
(05:26):
these place he started is overseeing the workforce, which many
of his supporters and allies say, Look, he's the president,
of course he can fire all these folks. Even though
many of these entities and agencies and folks are protected
by Congressional law. And that's where the right crisis question
comes into play.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Right because Congress is the part of the government that
appropriates the funding for these departments and for these positions.
So how could a president or an executive branch say
we're not going to pay what you've already said you want.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
Because right now, the Congress controlled by Republicans, their main
ideology is their fealty to Donald Trump. I mean, go
out here and try to find a Republican in the
House or in the Senate who is willing to stand
up for federal workers right now. I mean Lisa Murkowski
of Alaska has made some early comments and statements saying
that she's concerned and people are calling up to her office.
(06:23):
I have congressional Republicans who I've spoken to their offices,
their staffers, chief of staffs, who've told me that we
got folks from our states calling us, you know, with
serious questions, not knowing what's happening. Federal workers calling us,
not knowing what's going on. The real question, I think
is for Senator John Thune and for Speaker Johnson, what
are they going to do and I think they're giving
you the answer nothing. Right. We are a fresh off
(06:46):
of the election where Donald Trump feels empowered, where his
MACA fuel base certainly has had a full blown takeover
of the Republican Party, and there isn't any moderate or
less than MAGA aligned Republican right now who seems to
be willing to put it on the line or leave
it on the field and maybe filibuster or block because again,
(07:06):
this is not coming from any sort of legislative action.
This is the executive branch, and Congress at this point
has not stepped up, not at all.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
What about the people who have been laid off? We
were going to be joined on this podcast right now
by someone who has just let go from the General
Services Administration in a you said Friday afternoon. This person
got a one in the morning email saying that their
job was gone. They've been working in the federal government
for decades and was concerned in the end that talking
(07:36):
publicly could jeopardize any severance they might be entitled to.
Are many fired workers, laid off workers speaking out publicly?
Was it hard for you to contact people?
Speaker 3 (07:46):
Well, the folks that I've been able to speak to,
and we you said they have been able to reach
out to for the most part, have been very willing
and open to talk. But there have been from notebook
dumps from some of my colleagues and others in our
conversations of employees who have been contacted mysteriously by the
Doeze website or the doge page on Facebook when they've
(08:07):
made criticisms of these firings or criticisms of Elon Musk.
Very big brother sort of behavior that you're hearing from
a lot of these federal employees. But you're right, some
people are in that sort of wait and see space.
They're like, I don't want to speak out because I
haven't gotten my unemployment benefits yet. I don't want to
speak out because, yeah, I'm worried about my severance package.
(08:27):
Because again, these are folks who have said, look, I've
gotten great reviews the entire time. One of our first
stories out of USAY today was talking to folks who
had gotten stellar reviews before this, and then they get
a letter saying you're being let go because of your
substandard work or your below review or whatever else, and
they're like, well, that's not true to what my record showed.
So who's going to sort that out. You know, almost
(08:49):
looks like we have a multi class action lawsuit on
our hands here, right, Jere. I mean, I mean, like
that's what I'm looking at here. But I don't think
you're going to see this sort out anytime soon. I
mean a lot of these employees who did this for
civic purposes, right, A lot of these folks are not
hard core partisans. I mean, we're talking about people who
work on soil erosion in Iowa, right, trail maintenance for
(09:12):
public parks in Montana, affordable housing in Maryland, ethics directors
in DC, and me. We were talking about really wonky,
nerdy people here who got involved in government because it
was a stable job and because they wanted to serve
their country. So they're not hard core partisans, but they
are regular folks who I think are worried about what
their future is and where their future lies. So you
(09:33):
are seeing some folks who aren't as willing. But I
think there's been a good chunk of people who feel
like they've been wronged and are willing to speak out.
But we should absolutely pay attention to those who feel intimidated,
and when you hear their stories about the intimidation. Again,
it sounds straight out of Big Brother. I mean, you're
having folks who are telling me Jerry fa workers who
are saying, look, I want to say something to you,
(09:55):
I want to speak out, but I just got a
message from somebody at Dose on my post on social media.
And again, this relationship between Donald Trump and a lot
of these social media owners and entities, including Elon Musk
who also owns x formally known as Twitter, there's a
lot of sort of nervousness. I haven't seen anything like
this before. Right, people have been talking about cutting waste, fraud,
(10:17):
and abuse in the federal government, state government, local governments
for decades. Yeah, the first time I've seen workers fear
the government that they wanted to serve and work for.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Well, and you say waste, fraud and abuse and let's
just folk, I mean, you take abuse and fraud out
and then you're just talking about waste, which you could
classify just about anything that you don't want to spend
money on as waiste. But if you're talking about waste
and you say that these people have received in many
cases perfect performance reviews, one of the things that I've
noticed that's kind of surprising is the Trump administration has
(10:53):
been letting people go who are in a probationary period.
But the probationary period can also include I just got
a promotion because I was so good at my job.
I got a promotion, and I've been a probationary period
in my new role, and so I got fired.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Yeah. And the other part about is Jereby by no
means this. It's funny for folks. But I think it's
just the calamity of the scale of this and what
Musk and Trump are proposing, and people maybe perhaps weren't
paying as much attention missing some of the nuances of
some of these folks have been laid off and then
immediately reinstated and brought back because the realization, oh, you
(11:29):
do a pretty important job like guarding our you know,
nuclear power plans, or doing some really important work like
for veterans for disabilities, I mean science agencies had to
reinstate some of these, like I think about several dozen
folks from the National Science Foundation or reinstated after you know,
a court ruling and guidance from I think the US
(11:51):
Office of Personnel Management. So a lot of this looks
clumsy because it is because there hasn't been a standard
other in that sort of broad waste, fraud and abuse,
which often I think is in a more political lens
for people, there hasn't been an explanation of, well, why
did these IRS, you know, six thousand IRS employees get
(12:11):
laid off? Of why are these folks in hud and
because again the doe's website is hit or miss. There
is a lot of mystery in this. There is a
lot of people asking questions, even of their member of Congress,
who really can't because that's usually where people go when
they want an answer to getting a Social Security check
or getting some sort of government service or help. They
call their congressmen, they call their senator, and those folks
(12:33):
really don't know. Because the President of the United States
has handed off making hiring and firing decisions for the government,
for the federal government over again to the richest man
in the world, who has eccentric behaviors, who has sort
of oft again explanations that sometimes makes sense that sometimes don't.
Even during their first cabinet meeting, he admitted mistakes are
(12:56):
going to be made, but these aren't mistakes for you know,
icycle shop, you know, hiring and fire and a local Walmart.
These are hiring firings of our federal system. And I
was talking to a federal employee about this, and they
reminded me the silent hand of government success. All the
times that you see government doing the right thing that
you really don't pay attention to because it did it
(13:19):
fine before. So what's the like, what's that old saying.
You know, we're not going to put on the front
page how many planes landed safely because it just happens.
But when it doesn't happen, when it doesn't work, that's
when you'll notice it. And so when people are asking
how's this going to be absorbed, what's the long term
effects of this, Well, you're going to see it from
all the little bitty things that the federal government does
(13:39):
correctly that you don't notice because it does it well
and it's not a problem. Well, when those things start
to malfunction or there start to be some adjustments and
maybe the states have to take on, maybe the cities
have to take on, maybe the private sector has to
take more and more on. That's where I think you're
going to see the realization of what is truly happening
before us right now.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
Well, and I want to talk just after our break
about out how these cuts are affecting all of us
or may affect all of us. But one more thing
before we take that break, which is all these employees
had to fill out those five things you did last
week emails, or some of them did. Some of their
bosses told them, don't worry about it, that doesn't apply
to you, and then they said, actually it does apply
to you. Did those actually matter or are people who
(14:20):
filled those out still being let go?
Speaker 3 (14:22):
When Musk was confronted with this, he sort of tried
to dodge it a little bit and say, oh, we
just really did that just to see if these people
are actually alive, right, that they actually respond to their emails,
that it's actually a person on there. So I wouldn't
be shocked if you had some federal employees come forward
and say I was fired because I didn't fill out
(14:44):
that five questions, didn't respond where other folks are being
told don't worry, that doesn't apply to you, and I
think you know not all federal employees, unfortunately, are created equally, right,
like the assistant US attorney in Massachusetts is different. Then again,
the woman who's working on the trails for public parks
(15:04):
in Montana. And I think that's what you're really seeing.
It's completely arbitrary. That doesn't seem to be any sort
of directive of or yardstick of Here's who gets fired,
here's who stays. Here are the agencies that are exempt.
Here the agencies where it's really going to be a
crackdown and in matter. And I think that's the point too,
is that it's giving all of these different Trump acolytes
(15:25):
who are in these positions now the freedom to decide
on their own right. So when this five give us
the five things that you've done, think from musk Well,
some departments that the AGENCID don't worry about. That doesn't
apply to you, but others said, no, that does, and
that gives me the ability to fire you if I
want to. So it's really going to be the testimony
of each and every federal employee who steps forward. And
(15:48):
only until we are able to go through this haystack
of firings and memos and edicts will we really be
able to discern and give I think people a fuller
map of what we're experiencing. But it's as with Donald
Trump and everything else in the campaign. In one point, Zho.
This is an unprecedented shift and cut to federal workforce.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
We're speaking with USA Today Chief Political correspondent Philip Bailey
on One Thing Trump did. Will be right back in
a moment. Welcome back to One Thing Trump did exclusively
(16:37):
on the Middle Podcast Feed. I'm Jeremy Hobson. This episode,
we're talking about the ongoing firings of workers across the
federal government. I'm joined by USA Today Chief Political correspondent
Philip Bailey. Philip, there has been some pushback already, including
by some Republicans, about the lack of compassion here, that
people are losing their jobs, their benefits, They may have
(16:58):
mortgages and car payments and other Spence's kids. What are
you hearing from fired federal workers about the impact on
their own lives.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Wow, it's amazing to me how we look at federal workers.
A lot of people don't look at them as private
sector workers. There is this sort of dismissal of them.
Federal workers that we've spoken to a USA Today run
the gamut. There are some who don't know what they're
going to do next. They have been in civic service
(17:29):
for decades and they're not really sure what comes next,
like again the severance package. Do they get unemployment they're applying.
There was one woman we spoke to shouts about colleagues,
Sarah Wyre, Riley Beg and Terry Collins and others, Samantha Leach,
and she was talking about Look, she's worked in the
(17:50):
Federal Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and she was saying,
even though she's gotten a five out of five score
in her performance review, that couldn't protect her. And many
of these employees are worried about So this letter says
that I was dismissed a fire for this reason, even
though I got perfect scores on my you know, reviews
(18:11):
and everything. So how's that going to affect my ability
to get another job in the private sector? Right? Like
here you are holding up this letter from the federal
government saying you were fired because of this when your
review is the exact opposite. Will that ever be sorted out?
So the uncertainty and the anxiety, particularly at a time
where the mantra of the twenty twenty four election on
(18:31):
both sides was the cost of living. People keeping up
with their paychecks. You know how difficult it is, and
how the affordability crisis, the rent is too damn high,
et cetera in this country. One of the first things
that Donald Trump is doing is letting go all of
these folks, which may, by the way, have an impact
down the line on unemployment rates as well.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
Well. And that's my next question is you know, I
was a business reporter for many years, and things like
hurricanes can actually have an impact on the GDP because
of the downturn in economic activity, let's say in Florida
or Georgia or something like that. If you're talking about thousands,
tens of thousands, maybe even more than one hundred thousand
federal workers being laid off, are their concerns that this
(19:16):
could lead to a recession in the US?
Speaker 3 (19:19):
Well, I think that everyone is sort of bracing for
the potential, the potential of that. I know that President
Trump and his allies will say, look, they'll continue to
hit the waste frog and abuse mantra. But yet injecting
tens of thousands of unemployed people into the economy will
have an impact. It's just a matter of when is
that measured and how the economy will absorb that, right.
(19:43):
I think that look, each week, the Labor Department's employment
and Training administration. They report the numbers of people who
you file for state unemployment benefits. Right, other numbers are
going to come in. I think that different states are
going to be hit with this differently. Like in Oklahoma,
for example, they're going to have a whole different problem
with this with their federal workforce being laid off than
(20:03):
in New York. Because we're already seeing democratic governors Jeremy
in blue states try to say, hey, look we're gonna
step up and we're going to try to absorb some
of these folks come work for the state government. Right,
You're going to have a lot of people with a
lot of experience, right, who are going to be now
in the workforce, and they may get scooped up by
the private sector. I think that a lot of more
free market thinkers would would argue that, look, those people
(20:26):
are going to be hired here. I did read a
report about folks from intelligence agencies might be scooped up
from by foreign governments given their background and experts, which
may not be a good thing. May not be so
much of this reporting in these stories, Jeremy have been
listening to folks give you their not the numbers. I'll
(20:47):
be honest, like a lot of my reporting lately has
not been about numbers. It's been about the heart, it's
been about the anxiety. It's been about not people who
again didn't do this because they were some wild eyed
liberal or some hardcore conservative. They wanted to serve their
country and you know, outside of the military, how do
you do that? And we can judge each of these
(21:09):
people's jobs and performances individuallys And I think there is
an a credible viewpoint here from Trump supporters who I
talk to, say, look, I think every two years the
federal government should be doing this, and I think there
is a vital and viable conversation about we should be
examining what our government spends its money on and are
these jobs necessary? And what are we doing here? But
(21:29):
that doesn't seem to be what we're doing in this situation.
It doesn't seem like we're going through with a fine
toothed comb. It appears as if we're looking and saying
that right there, get rid of all of that. We
just don't like it. And I think that's the political
part of this that's beginning to emerge, that they could
I think we're seeing in some of these poll numbers already.
The American people's squeamishness about this is that is it
(21:50):
being done to actually absorb and go after cost savings? Right,
We're simply looking at entities and parts of the bureaucracy
that you find politically objectionable.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
Well, and by the way, if you took away like
half of all the federal workers, you're still not going
to make that big of a dent in the deficits
in the debt because so much of the money that
is spent by the federal government goes to benefits, not people.
It's going to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Yeah, I mean we're a giant insurance company with guns.
I mean, that's that's where we goes in this country. Right,
Like it's if you really want, if you really are
a deficit hawk, you have two stark choices here, and
we understood for decades while those things were never touched.
Either you go into entitlements or you go into the military.
Right like you'll have there's much more cost savings and
(22:37):
shutting down and closing a military base than firing fifty
people from you know, from the Agriculture Department, firing a
thousand people from the irs. But I think that also
goes back to Jerry the political part of this, which
the Trump administration and his allies have not hidden. February
twenty six memo from omb director of RUSS Vote. I
(23:00):
mean it best explains the official reason. And he said
the federal government is costly and efficient and quote deeply
in debt unquote. No mention by the way of tax
cuts and other things that add to that. That by
the way that this administration presumably wants to extend those
Trump tax cuts. But Voight said this, and I thought
this was very interesting to read out here, and I
(23:21):
wanted to call this point out specifically. In that memo,
he said, quote Voight said, quote at the same time,
it is not producing results for the American public. Instead,
tax dollars are being siphoned off to fund unproductive and
unnecessary programs that benefit radical interest groups while hurting hard
working American citizens unquote. And I was talking to a
(23:43):
Republican activist about this who worked in a previous Republican administration,
I'll say that, and they were saying that, Look, every
time a Republican is elected, because Ronald Reagan, George W.
Bush first, Donald Trump basically even when they win, like
with Trump with the popular vote, they're sitting on top
of a liberal bureaucracy of all these things that have
(24:05):
been installed through the budget to the tax code over decades,
and you're finally seen. And this is why I think
when you talk to Trump supporters, they're elated about this,
even when Jeremy it might be a program that they
benefit from or someone that they know benefits, because they
see this as a larger political mission of every time
we vote our congress in or our conservative person in
(24:26):
to get something done. They sit on top of this
bureaucracy that honestly provide a lot of resistance to Donald
Trump in one point zero. So I think that if
we pull back here and look at the actual words
that the administration is saying, that's your answer right there.
Programs that benefit radical interest groups in their viewpoint, that
liberal bureaucracy that resisted Donald Trump the first time. That's
(24:49):
your ethics folks, right, that's your people who are overseen
and say no, no, mister president. At one point, Oh,
get those folks up out of here, because if we're
really going after the cost savings, Jeremy question is what
is those going to do? With the Pentagon and entitlements.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
Well, and I also think back to what happened in
Kansas many years ago when Sam Brownback, who was the governor,
very conservative guy, very small government conservative, went in made
huge tax cuts. They had to make big cuts to
their education system, and it was so bad for the
people of Kansas that the Republican legislature overturned his veto
(25:26):
and undid those tax cuts because they realized, oh, actually,
we do need that money for the schools. What kind
of impacts are we going to see as Americans when
you cut hundreds of people from the FAA or so
many people from the National Parks, the CDC. Do you
have any sense of what we're going to see, how
we're going to see this in our daily lives.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
I think that the story that awakened for me how
serious this could be was a few days ago. I
think it was CNBC and they spoke to former Maryland
Governor Martin Mai, who just recently was buying for d
n C chairman. So take that, you know, put that
into context that you know, Martin Maley just a few
(26:08):
weeks ago was trying to be the leader of the opposition,
but he also under the Biden administration served, I believe
as his administrator for Social Security, and Governor O'Malley told
see NBC point blank he sees in the next thirty
to ninety days with some of these cuts, a total
(26:28):
system collapsed and then interruption of benefits where you could
see checks being missed, being spent or sent out. If
that starts, we're going to have a problem on our hands.
Like don't turtle half folks not get their Social Security check. Now,
maybe Martin O'Malley again, who is just trying to be
d NC chair, is lighting his hair on fire and
(26:50):
causing a ruckus to create a bad headline for the
Trump administration. But you know, those benefit checks for roughly
what seventy two million Americans being at risk is a
significant would be a significant. I mean we think that
what's going on with the airlines and the air traffic controllers,
I mean that I'll tell you what has really the
(27:13):
saving grace for Donald Trump Jeremy was when that Southwest
Airlines pilot at the last second lifted that plane out
of the sky that didn't fly yet. Thank goodness, all
the lives that were spared because of that, But that
would have reintroduced the conversation about what's happening with our
air traffic controllers, and again I go back to what
(27:33):
I said earlier, that that silent hand of success every
time the federal government does what it's supposed to do
and you just don't notice it. What happens when there's
a natural disaster. What happens when or if some of
these Social Security checks get delayed? We've laid off how
many IRS workers right before tax returncies? And who's going
(27:55):
to be disproportionately affected by that will be your states
that are more dependent on the government, your poorer states,
which tend to be red states that went overwhelmingly for
Donald Trump. I think this is a political question that
is really exclusive to the right to the marga right.
I've already seen, you know, Josh Holly and some pretty
(28:16):
conservative voices speak out and say, we're not touching medicaid
right because as Steve Bannon, one of Trump's former advisors,
one of his closest confidences, at least at one point zero,
as he said on his show, a lot of MAGA
folks are all medicaid. So the impact of this could
be grave, it could be deep, but it could also though,
(28:37):
be I think a stark realization for Trump's opposition of
what this election and how consequential it actually is. Because
when I talk to you know, Trump supporters, not even
federal workers, jeremy Trump supporters, and I asked them about this,
they are fully even I they're not paying attention to
all the details and all every in and out. They're
(28:59):
telling me, this is what we wanted. This is absolutely
there is going to be some pain. They are fully
acknowledging to me there's going to be some pain involved
in this.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
But what about on the other side, We're already seeing
these town hall meetings where people are getting really upset
with Republican members of Congress and voicing their concerns about
these cuts. I think back to the Tea Party after
Obama was elected, coming in and getting very angry, and
then they really did have an impact in the midterm
(29:29):
elections in twenty ten. What kind of response has there been.
Is it as much as you expected? More or less?
Will it get bigger? What do you think?
Speaker 3 (29:39):
Well, I mean, I look at some of the poll
numbers and those town hall meetings. The area that I'm
looking for mainly is with independence right like NPR Mayrige
to release a poll recently. They found like fifty five
percent of Americans believe that these staff and funding cuts
(29:59):
to the federal go will do more harm than good.
That includes sixty one percent of independence. Right. I think
that same survey found that sixty percent of residents or
sixty percent of US adults believe most of the government
employees are essential to the function of the government. That
sway with independence for those middle of the road, for
(30:23):
those more not like say moderate, but those swing state
Republicans and those congressional districts. But these are some of these,
you know, town halls are happening in deep red areas
though too. The question is for the Republican Party, and
I think this is very difficult for any party when
you have a popular president at the hell who's doing
things that may not always be popular in your district
(30:45):
or your neck of the woods. It's who's going to
have that courage. I think the early signs show that
there is a chink in Donald Trump's armor, which I
think when you look at the issues that he really
leans into that are very popular, like immigration and deportation.
I think I've always said to folks Jeremy that if
the politics go bad for Donald Trump, the showmanship will
go up. We'll see deportations on TV every night, right
(31:10):
if people start really getting upset with this until he
maybe finally relents. And of course I think one strategy
could always be throwing Elon Musk himself under the bus potentially,
But no, I think that these town halls are the
first sign that this isn't what some people voted for.
I think also when you look at that special election
(31:31):
in Maine, an area in which Donald Trump won by
small percentage, but a Democrat winning there pretty decisively. So look,
I think that we have a lot to absorb here,
a lot to figure out. But I do think that
these town halls they're the first indication. But I think
I need to see a little bit more than that,
(31:51):
right because my questions about those town halls are is
that happening organically, Is that happening from outside groups? Is
that happening for people of Are those people speaking out
those town halls Trump supporters who've turned are those folks
who are always the liberal person in that area in
the district who didn't like any of this stuff anyway?
And I'm interested to see, particularly in some of these
states that rely so much on the federal Again, a
(32:14):
lot of your conservative, red Republican states are welfare states,
my homestate of Kentucky being one of them. Right Like,
as much as it might vote one way, it is
reliant on Illinois, California, and New York putting money into
this pot. And we all put money out of it
when we need it for disaster relief, for or medicai
or whatever else. And I have the feeling that these
(32:37):
town halls right now are the first signs of it.
But you're gonna need a monumental movement, particularly in the
first two I mean, he's only been in office six weeks,
so everyone who's like we need to put us it's
like he just got there.
Speaker 1 (32:51):
You are and will and let me ask you just
finally on that point, he's only been in office for
a matter of weeks. Is this just the beginning though?
In terms of the layoffs, are they gonna ramp up
or are we getting towards the end of them? Do
we have any sense of how far he's gonna go.
Speaker 3 (33:08):
I think this is just the beginning. We've already seen
my man Joy Wilker and Joey Garrison, one of our
White House reporters has written about this that there's already
been these warnings of a new round of more aggressive layoffs,
and I think you're going to see particularly some of
these more liberal pet projects and parts of liberal bureaucracy
that will be attacked and gone after and cut or
(33:31):
eliminated all together. The Department of Education. That's still the
open question. Will there even be a Department of Education
this year. I think that you're going to see the
Trump administration sort of figure this out. But I think
that the again, I'll go back to that void memo.
I think this is the point. I think that the Department
of Education's days are numbered. Personally, I just think that, like,
(33:53):
it's pretty clear from the political direction that this administration
is going, but it's also a question of when, right
not if. That's how I look at this, is that
we're going to pathodically go through each of these sectors
of the federal government and the parts that we may
find some actual waste from abuse in great but some
parts that we just find to be No. We won
(34:14):
the election and we don't want to put money into
this anymore. I mean that's the true message of that memo.
Things that we find that we find politically objectionable. We're
getting rid of them. And they may have been here
for ten twenty thirty years, but not on my watch.
And this president feels emboldened. I think this Congress has
emboldened him even further. And unless you mean you're seeing
(34:36):
some protests, and like you said, you mentioned the town halls,
but unless you see a monumental sort of pushback from
the American public. You know, in some of these polling numbers,
we're not there yet. We're not at sixty eight seventy
eighty percent of Americans to this.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
That is Philip Bailey, who is the chief local correspondent
for USA Today. Philip, thank you.
Speaker 3 (34:56):
So much, Jeremy, as always, and thanks.
Speaker 1 (34:58):
You for listening to One Thing Trump Did. It was
produced by Harrison Fatino. Our next middle episode is coming
to your podcast feeds later this week. It is a
conversation about trans rights, which of course have come under
attack since President Trump took office. And if you like
this podcast, please rate it wherever you get your podcast,
tell your friends and sign up for automatic downloads. Our
theme music was composed by Noah Haidu. I'm Jeremy Hobson
(35:21):
Talk to you soon.
Welcome to One Thing Trump Did, available exclusively on The
Middle podcast feed on Jeremy Hobson. Each week on this podcast,
we're looking at one thing President Trump did, since there
is so much happening, and we're going to try and
break things down in the same rational, nonpartisan, factual way
we do on The Middle. In this episode, our one
thing is the firing of so many federal workers in
(00:38):
the name of cost cutting by the Department of Government Efficiency,
which is headed by Elon Musk. The federal government is
the largest employer in America, with three million civilians on
the payroll. Musk was asked how many employees he's looking
to cut in total.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
We wish to keep everyone who is doing a job
that is essential and that job well. But if the
job is not essential or they're not doing the job well,
debviously should not be on the public peril.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Joining me now is USA Today Chief political correspondent Philip Bailey,
who happens to hold the record for most frequent guest
appearances on the Middle of Phillip, great to have you
on One Thing Trump did.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
Jeremy, how's it going.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
It's going very well. So the first thing that happened
when it comes to these federal workers was that they
got offered a buyout, they could leave, their jobs, would
be paid for the next several months. About seventy five
thousand took that deal, but then the firings began. What
we know so far about how many people have been fired.
Speaker 3 (01:41):
Good questions, Jeah, I mean approximately. I think, like you said,
seventy five thousand federal employees have taken that buyout. I
believe now as the layoffs continue, about one hundred thousand
workers have taken those buyouts or been fired. So I
think about twenty five thousand is where we're sitting at.
And these numbers are going to fluctuate and change because
(02:03):
this is I think the chaos is a part of
the strategy here. I think it's to keep everyone sort
of unsure about what's going on in the Agriculture Department,
what's going on with the VA, what's going on at HUD,
what's going on with the Social Security Administration. Right, So,
we don't have any solid numbers because when you go
on the DOSEE website, even when they post their receipts
(02:25):
of all the windfalls and the cost savings, those change
because there have been some calculating erarors on this. We
have never seen Jeremy this sort of acts or knife
being taken to our federal workforce, particularly at the helm
of the richest man in the world. That's the part
I think we have to keep reminding folks, is that
(02:47):
the President of the United States and the world's richest
man have determined that there's all this waste, fraud and
abuse here. We're going after that. We're cutting folks back,
We're seeing who's efficient, who's not, and everyone's sort of
in the administration at least is keeping a smile on
this and keeping a pretty face towards it. But more
and more you're hearing these federal workers and their unions
speak out and saying I wasn't even given really an
(03:09):
explanation of why. Right, So the number sits about twenty
five thousand, but I think we're in the moment, so
some of this reporting will change day to day. So
whatever number we say here today could be something different.
This second round of major layoffs is coming.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Well, you mentioned the unions. Not all federal workers are
in unions, but do the unions have power to stop
any of the layoffs?
Speaker 3 (03:33):
Well, they have found lawsuits and somewhat successful in that.
You know, it depends on what courts do what, But
I mean, you certainly have seen some of these unions
for federal workers step up and put out series of
press releases and put out lawsuits and try to rally
their employees and initially urging a lot of them to stay,
don't give in, don't give up, don't walk away from
(03:56):
your job. But when it comes to anyone's ability to
stop this, I mean, I think we were seeing what
Donald Trump do here. We haven't really seen a Republican
president take this on to this degree maybe since Ronald
Reagan in about forty something years ago in the nineteen eighties.
So the unions are for the most part powerless. There
hasn't been any conversation about a strike. There hasn't been
any conversation about a work stoppag which you'll probably honestly
(04:19):
feed into with Donald Trump and Elon Musk want right,
is the further show an underscore. I look all these
folks who want to sort of sit at home and
not do their job and now protest or boycott. So
I have a sense that when we are talking about
this federal workforce and the changes that it's undergoing in
this sort of anxiety. A lot of these federal workers, who,
(04:39):
by the way, are getting these pink slips on a
Friday afternoon, and many of them are still in their
probationary status, and there's still a legal question of that
in the courts right out of Northern California, with the
judge there putting a halt to some of the probationary
workers being laid off. I don't think we're gonna get
a full answer for the next couple of weeks, as
the union and other opponents of Donald Trump's figure out
(05:03):
what's the best strategy. The courts have had some limited
aspects here, like again the buyout was paused and then
it was allowed to go forward. I think the many
folks in the opposition of Donald Trump would think that
these court rulings can do something. But from what I'm seeing, Jeremy,
from my vantage point, the unions are trying their mightiest,
But ultimately this president is testing his authority and first
(05:26):
these place he started is overseeing the workforce, which many
of his supporters and allies say, Look, he's the president,
of course he can fire all these folks. Even though
many of these entities and agencies and folks are protected
by Congressional law. And that's where the right crisis question
comes into play.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Right because Congress is the part of the government that
appropriates the funding for these departments and for these positions.
So how could a president or an executive branch say
we're not going to pay what you've already said you want.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
Because right now, the Congress controlled by Republicans, their main
ideology is their fealty to Donald Trump. I mean, go
out here and try to find a Republican in the
House or in the Senate who is willing to stand
up for federal workers right now. I mean Lisa Murkowski
of Alaska has made some early comments and statements saying
that she's concerned and people are calling up to her office.
(06:23):
I have congressional Republicans who I've spoken to their offices,
their staffers, chief of staffs, who've told me that we
got folks from our states calling us, you know, with
serious questions, not knowing what's happening. Federal workers calling us,
not knowing what's going on. The real question, I think
is for Senator John Thune and for Speaker Johnson, what
are they going to do and I think they're giving
you the answer nothing. Right. We are a fresh off
(06:46):
of the election where Donald Trump feels empowered, where his
MACA fuel base certainly has had a full blown takeover
of the Republican Party, and there isn't any moderate or
less than MAGA aligned Republican right now who seems to
be willing to put it on the line or leave
it on the field and maybe filibuster or block because again,
(07:06):
this is not coming from any sort of legislative action.
This is the executive branch, and Congress at this point
has not stepped up, not at all.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
What about the people who have been laid off? We
were going to be joined on this podcast right now
by someone who has just let go from the General
Services Administration in a you said Friday afternoon. This person
got a one in the morning email saying that their
job was gone. They've been working in the federal government
for decades and was concerned in the end that talking
(07:36):
publicly could jeopardize any severance they might be entitled to.
Are many fired workers, laid off workers speaking out publicly?
Was it hard for you to contact people?
Speaker 3 (07:46):
Well, the folks that I've been able to speak to,
and we you said they have been able to reach
out to for the most part, have been very willing
and open to talk. But there have been from notebook
dumps from some of my colleagues and others in our
conversations of employees who have been contacted mysteriously by the
Doeze website or the doge page on Facebook when they've
(08:07):
made criticisms of these firings or criticisms of Elon Musk.
Very big brother sort of behavior that you're hearing from
a lot of these federal employees. But you're right, some
people are in that sort of wait and see space.
They're like, I don't want to speak out because I
haven't gotten my unemployment benefits yet. I don't want to
speak out because, yeah, I'm worried about my severance package.
(08:27):
Because again, these are folks who have said, look, I've
gotten great reviews the entire time. One of our first
stories out of USAY today was talking to folks who
had gotten stellar reviews before this, and then they get
a letter saying you're being let go because of your
substandard work or your below review or whatever else, and
they're like, well, that's not true to what my record showed.
So who's going to sort that out. You know, almost
(08:49):
looks like we have a multi class action lawsuit on
our hands here, right, Jere. I mean, I mean, like
that's what I'm looking at here. But I don't think
you're going to see this sort out anytime soon. I
mean a lot of these employees who did this for
civic purposes, right, A lot of these folks are not
hard core partisans. I mean, we're talking about people who
work on soil erosion in Iowa, right, trail maintenance for
(09:12):
public parks in Montana, affordable housing in Maryland, ethics directors
in DC, and me. We were talking about really wonky,
nerdy people here who got involved in government because it
was a stable job and because they wanted to serve
their country. So they're not hard core partisans, but they
are regular folks who I think are worried about what
their future is and where their future lies. So you
(09:33):
are seeing some folks who aren't as willing. But I
think there's been a good chunk of people who feel
like they've been wronged and are willing to speak out.
But we should absolutely pay attention to those who feel intimidated,
and when you hear their stories about the intimidation. Again,
it sounds straight out of Big Brother. I mean, you're
having folks who are telling me Jerry fa workers who
are saying, look, I want to say something to you,
(09:55):
I want to speak out, but I just got a
message from somebody at Dose on my post on social media.
And again, this relationship between Donald Trump and a lot
of these social media owners and entities, including Elon Musk
who also owns x formally known as Twitter, there's a
lot of sort of nervousness. I haven't seen anything like
this before. Right, people have been talking about cutting waste, fraud,
(10:17):
and abuse in the federal government, state government, local governments
for decades. Yeah, the first time I've seen workers fear
the government that they wanted to serve and work for.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Well, and you say waste, fraud and abuse and let's
just folk, I mean, you take abuse and fraud out
and then you're just talking about waste, which you could
classify just about anything that you don't want to spend
money on as waiste. But if you're talking about waste
and you say that these people have received in many
cases perfect performance reviews, one of the things that I've
noticed that's kind of surprising is the Trump administration has
(10:53):
been letting people go who are in a probationary period.
But the probationary period can also include I just got
a promotion because I was so good at my job.
I got a promotion, and I've been a probationary period
in my new role, and so I got fired.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Yeah. And the other part about is Jereby by no
means this. It's funny for folks. But I think it's
just the calamity of the scale of this and what
Musk and Trump are proposing, and people maybe perhaps weren't
paying as much attention missing some of the nuances of
some of these folks have been laid off and then
immediately reinstated and brought back because the realization, oh, you
(11:29):
do a pretty important job like guarding our you know,
nuclear power plans, or doing some really important work like
for veterans for disabilities, I mean science agencies had to
reinstate some of these, like I think about several dozen
folks from the National Science Foundation or reinstated after you know,
a court ruling and guidance from I think the US
(11:51):
Office of Personnel Management. So a lot of this looks
clumsy because it is because there hasn't been a standard
other in that sort of broad waste, fraud and abuse,
which often I think is in a more political lens
for people, there hasn't been an explanation of, well, why
did these IRS, you know, six thousand IRS employees get
(12:11):
laid off? Of why are these folks in hud and
because again the doe's website is hit or miss. There
is a lot of mystery in this. There is a
lot of people asking questions, even of their member of Congress,
who really can't because that's usually where people go when
they want an answer to getting a Social Security check
or getting some sort of government service or help. They
call their congressmen, they call their senator, and those folks
(12:33):
really don't know. Because the President of the United States
has handed off making hiring and firing decisions for the government,
for the federal government over again to the richest man
in the world, who has eccentric behaviors, who has sort
of oft again explanations that sometimes makes sense that sometimes don't.
Even during their first cabinet meeting, he admitted mistakes are
(12:56):
going to be made, but these aren't mistakes for you know,
icycle shop, you know, hiring and fire and a local Walmart.
These are hiring firings of our federal system. And I
was talking to a federal employee about this, and they
reminded me the silent hand of government success. All the
times that you see government doing the right thing that
you really don't pay attention to because it did it
(13:19):
fine before. So what's the like, what's that old saying.
You know, we're not going to put on the front
page how many planes landed safely because it just happens.
But when it doesn't happen, when it doesn't work, that's
when you'll notice it. And so when people are asking
how's this going to be absorbed, what's the long term
effects of this, Well, you're going to see it from
all the little bitty things that the federal government does
(13:39):
correctly that you don't notice because it does it well
and it's not a problem. Well, when those things start
to malfunction or there start to be some adjustments and
maybe the states have to take on, maybe the cities
have to take on, maybe the private sector has to
take more and more on. That's where I think you're
going to see the realization of what is truly happening
before us right now.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
Well, and I want to talk just after our break
about out how these cuts are affecting all of us
or may affect all of us. But one more thing
before we take that break, which is all these employees
had to fill out those five things you did last
week emails, or some of them did. Some of their
bosses told them, don't worry about it, that doesn't apply
to you, and then they said, actually it does apply
to you. Did those actually matter or are people who
(14:20):
filled those out still being let go?
Speaker 3 (14:22):
When Musk was confronted with this, he sort of tried
to dodge it a little bit and say, oh, we
just really did that just to see if these people
are actually alive, right, that they actually respond to their emails,
that it's actually a person on there. So I wouldn't
be shocked if you had some federal employees come forward
and say I was fired because I didn't fill out
(14:44):
that five questions, didn't respond where other folks are being
told don't worry, that doesn't apply to you, and I
think you know not all federal employees, unfortunately, are created equally, right,
like the assistant US attorney in Massachusetts is different. Then again,
the woman who's working on the trails for public parks
(15:04):
in Montana. And I think that's what you're really seeing.
It's completely arbitrary. That doesn't seem to be any sort
of directive of or yardstick of Here's who gets fired,
here's who stays. Here are the agencies that are exempt.
Here the agencies where it's really going to be a
crackdown and in matter. And I think that's the point too,
is that it's giving all of these different Trump acolytes
(15:25):
who are in these positions now the freedom to decide
on their own right. So when this five give us
the five things that you've done, think from musk Well,
some departments that the AGENCID don't worry about. That doesn't
apply to you, but others said, no, that does, and
that gives me the ability to fire you if I
want to. So it's really going to be the testimony
of each and every federal employee who steps forward. And
(15:48):
only until we are able to go through this haystack
of firings and memos and edicts will we really be
able to discern and give I think people a fuller
map of what we're experiencing. But it's as with Donald
Trump and everything else in the campaign. In one point, Zho.
This is an unprecedented shift and cut to federal workforce.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
We're speaking with USA Today Chief Political correspondent Philip Bailey
on One Thing Trump did. Will be right back in
a moment. Welcome back to One Thing Trump did exclusively
(16:37):
on the Middle Podcast Feed. I'm Jeremy Hobson. This episode,
we're talking about the ongoing firings of workers across the
federal government. I'm joined by USA Today Chief Political correspondent
Philip Bailey. Philip, there has been some pushback already, including
by some Republicans, about the lack of compassion here, that
people are losing their jobs, their benefits, They may have
(16:58):
mortgages and car payments and other Spence's kids. What are
you hearing from fired federal workers about the impact on
their own lives.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Wow, it's amazing to me how we look at federal workers.
A lot of people don't look at them as private
sector workers. There is this sort of dismissal of them.
Federal workers that we've spoken to a USA Today run
the gamut. There are some who don't know what they're
going to do next. They have been in civic service
(17:29):
for decades and they're not really sure what comes next,
like again the severance package. Do they get unemployment they're applying.
There was one woman we spoke to shouts about colleagues,
Sarah Wyre, Riley Beg and Terry Collins and others, Samantha Leach,
and she was talking about Look, she's worked in the
(17:50):
Federal Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and she was saying,
even though she's gotten a five out of five score
in her performance review, that couldn't protect her. And many
of these employees are worried about So this letter says
that I was dismissed a fire for this reason, even
though I got perfect scores on my you know, reviews
(18:11):
and everything. So how's that going to affect my ability
to get another job in the private sector? Right? Like
here you are holding up this letter from the federal
government saying you were fired because of this when your
review is the exact opposite. Will that ever be sorted out?
So the uncertainty and the anxiety, particularly at a time
where the mantra of the twenty twenty four election on
(18:31):
both sides was the cost of living. People keeping up
with their paychecks. You know how difficult it is, and
how the affordability crisis, the rent is too damn high,
et cetera in this country. One of the first things
that Donald Trump is doing is letting go all of
these folks, which may, by the way, have an impact
down the line on unemployment rates as well.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
Well. And that's my next question is you know, I
was a business reporter for many years, and things like
hurricanes can actually have an impact on the GDP because
of the downturn in economic activity, let's say in Florida
or Georgia or something like that. If you're talking about thousands,
tens of thousands, maybe even more than one hundred thousand
federal workers being laid off, are their concerns that this
(19:16):
could lead to a recession in the US?
Speaker 3 (19:19):
Well, I think that everyone is sort of bracing for
the potential, the potential of that. I know that President
Trump and his allies will say, look, they'll continue to
hit the waste frog and abuse mantra. But yet injecting
tens of thousands of unemployed people into the economy will
have an impact. It's just a matter of when is
that measured and how the economy will absorb that, right.
(19:43):
I think that look, each week, the Labor Department's employment
and Training administration. They report the numbers of people who
you file for state unemployment benefits. Right, other numbers are
going to come in. I think that different states are
going to be hit with this differently. Like in Oklahoma,
for example, they're going to have a whole different problem
with this with their federal workforce being laid off than
(20:03):
in New York. Because we're already seeing democratic governors Jeremy
in blue states try to say, hey, look we're gonna
step up and we're going to try to absorb some
of these folks come work for the state government. Right,
You're going to have a lot of people with a
lot of experience, right, who are going to be now
in the workforce, and they may get scooped up by
the private sector. I think that a lot of more
free market thinkers would would argue that, look, those people
(20:26):
are going to be hired here. I did read a
report about folks from intelligence agencies might be scooped up
from by foreign governments given their background and experts, which
may not be a good thing. May not be so
much of this reporting in these stories, Jeremy have been
listening to folks give you their not the numbers. I'll
(20:47):
be honest, like a lot of my reporting lately has
not been about numbers. It's been about the heart, it's
been about the anxiety. It's been about not people who
again didn't do this because they were some wild eyed
liberal or some hardcore conservative. They wanted to serve their
country and you know, outside of the military, how do
you do that? And we can judge each of these
(21:09):
people's jobs and performances individuallys And I think there is
an a credible viewpoint here from Trump supporters who I
talk to, say, look, I think every two years the
federal government should be doing this, and I think there
is a vital and viable conversation about we should be
examining what our government spends its money on and are
these jobs necessary? And what are we doing here? But
(21:29):
that doesn't seem to be what we're doing in this situation.
It doesn't seem like we're going through with a fine
toothed comb. It appears as if we're looking and saying
that right there, get rid of all of that. We
just don't like it. And I think that's the political
part of this that's beginning to emerge, that they could
I think we're seeing in some of these poll numbers already.
The American people's squeamishness about this is that is it
(21:50):
being done to actually absorb and go after cost savings? Right,
We're simply looking at entities and parts of the bureaucracy
that you find politically objectionable.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
Well, and by the way, if you took away like
half of all the federal workers, you're still not going
to make that big of a dent in the deficits
in the debt because so much of the money that
is spent by the federal government goes to benefits, not people.
It's going to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Yeah, I mean we're a giant insurance company with guns.
I mean, that's that's where we goes in this country. Right,
Like it's if you really want, if you really are
a deficit hawk, you have two stark choices here, and
we understood for decades while those things were never touched.
Either you go into entitlements or you go into the military.
Right like you'll have there's much more cost savings and
(22:37):
shutting down and closing a military base than firing fifty
people from you know, from the Agriculture Department, firing a
thousand people from the irs. But I think that also
goes back to Jerry the political part of this, which
the Trump administration and his allies have not hidden. February
twenty six memo from omb director of RUSS Vote. I
(23:00):
mean it best explains the official reason. And he said
the federal government is costly and efficient and quote deeply
in debt unquote. No mention by the way of tax
cuts and other things that add to that. That by
the way that this administration presumably wants to extend those
Trump tax cuts. But Voight said this, and I thought
this was very interesting to read out here, and I
(23:21):
wanted to call this point out specifically. In that memo,
he said, quote Voight said, quote at the same time,
it is not producing results for the American public. Instead,
tax dollars are being siphoned off to fund unproductive and
unnecessary programs that benefit radical interest groups while hurting hard
working American citizens unquote. And I was talking to a
(23:43):
Republican activist about this who worked in a previous Republican administration,
I'll say that, and they were saying that, Look, every
time a Republican is elected, because Ronald Reagan, George W.
Bush first, Donald Trump basically even when they win, like
with Trump with the popular vote, they're sitting on top
of a liberal bureaucracy of all these things that have
(24:05):
been installed through the budget to the tax code over decades,
and you're finally seen. And this is why I think
when you talk to Trump supporters, they're elated about this,
even when Jeremy it might be a program that they
benefit from or someone that they know benefits, because they
see this as a larger political mission of every time
we vote our congress in or our conservative person in
(24:26):
to get something done. They sit on top of this
bureaucracy that honestly provide a lot of resistance to Donald
Trump in one point zero. So I think that if
we pull back here and look at the actual words
that the administration is saying, that's your answer right there.
Programs that benefit radical interest groups in their viewpoint, that
liberal bureaucracy that resisted Donald Trump the first time. That's
(24:49):
your ethics folks, right, that's your people who are overseen
and say no, no, mister president. At one point, Oh,
get those folks up out of here, because if we're
really going after the cost savings, Jeremy question is what
is those going to do? With the Pentagon and entitlements.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
Well, and I also think back to what happened in
Kansas many years ago when Sam Brownback, who was the governor,
very conservative guy, very small government conservative, went in made
huge tax cuts. They had to make big cuts to
their education system, and it was so bad for the
people of Kansas that the Republican legislature overturned his veto
(25:26):
and undid those tax cuts because they realized, oh, actually,
we do need that money for the schools. What kind
of impacts are we going to see as Americans when
you cut hundreds of people from the FAA or so
many people from the National Parks, the CDC. Do you
have any sense of what we're going to see, how
we're going to see this in our daily lives.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
I think that the story that awakened for me how
serious this could be was a few days ago. I
think it was CNBC and they spoke to former Maryland
Governor Martin Mai, who just recently was buying for d
n C chairman. So take that, you know, put that
into context that you know, Martin Maley just a few
(26:08):
weeks ago was trying to be the leader of the opposition,
but he also under the Biden administration served, I believe
as his administrator for Social Security, and Governor O'Malley told
see NBC point blank he sees in the next thirty
to ninety days with some of these cuts, a total
(26:28):
system collapsed and then interruption of benefits where you could
see checks being missed, being spent or sent out. If
that starts, we're going to have a problem on our hands.
Like don't turtle half folks not get their Social Security check. Now,
maybe Martin O'Malley again, who is just trying to be
d NC chair, is lighting his hair on fire and
(26:50):
causing a ruckus to create a bad headline for the
Trump administration. But you know, those benefit checks for roughly
what seventy two million Americans being at risk is a
significant would be a significant. I mean we think that
what's going on with the airlines and the air traffic controllers,
I mean that I'll tell you what has really the
(27:13):
saving grace for Donald Trump Jeremy was when that Southwest
Airlines pilot at the last second lifted that plane out
of the sky that didn't fly yet. Thank goodness, all
the lives that were spared because of that, But that
would have reintroduced the conversation about what's happening with our
air traffic controllers, and again I go back to what
(27:33):
I said earlier, that that silent hand of success every
time the federal government does what it's supposed to do
and you just don't notice it. What happens when there's
a natural disaster. What happens when or if some of
these Social Security checks get delayed? We've laid off how
many IRS workers right before tax returncies? And who's going
(27:55):
to be disproportionately affected by that will be your states
that are more dependent on the government, your poorer states,
which tend to be red states that went overwhelmingly for
Donald Trump. I think this is a political question that
is really exclusive to the right to the marga right.
I've already seen, you know, Josh Holly and some pretty
(28:16):
conservative voices speak out and say, we're not touching medicaid
right because as Steve Bannon, one of Trump's former advisors,
one of his closest confidences, at least at one point zero,
as he said on his show, a lot of MAGA
folks are all medicaid. So the impact of this could
be grave, it could be deep, but it could also though,
(28:37):
be I think a stark realization for Trump's opposition of
what this election and how consequential it actually is. Because
when I talk to you know, Trump supporters, not even
federal workers, jeremy Trump supporters, and I asked them about this,
they are fully even I they're not paying attention to
all the details and all every in and out. They're
(28:59):
telling me, this is what we wanted. This is absolutely
there is going to be some pain. They are fully
acknowledging to me there's going to be some pain involved
in this.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
But what about on the other side, We're already seeing
these town hall meetings where people are getting really upset
with Republican members of Congress and voicing their concerns about
these cuts. I think back to the Tea Party after
Obama was elected, coming in and getting very angry, and
then they really did have an impact in the midterm
(29:29):
elections in twenty ten. What kind of response has there been.
Is it as much as you expected? More or less?
Will it get bigger? What do you think?
Speaker 3 (29:39):
Well, I mean, I look at some of the poll
numbers and those town hall meetings. The area that I'm
looking for mainly is with independence right like NPR Mayrige
to release a poll recently. They found like fifty five
percent of Americans believe that these staff and funding cuts
(29:59):
to the federal go will do more harm than good.
That includes sixty one percent of independence. Right. I think
that same survey found that sixty percent of residents or
sixty percent of US adults believe most of the government
employees are essential to the function of the government. That
sway with independence for those middle of the road, for
(30:23):
those more not like say moderate, but those swing state
Republicans and those congressional districts. But these are some of these,
you know, town halls are happening in deep red areas
though too. The question is for the Republican Party, and
I think this is very difficult for any party when
you have a popular president at the hell who's doing
things that may not always be popular in your district
(30:45):
or your neck of the woods. It's who's going to
have that courage. I think the early signs show that
there is a chink in Donald Trump's armor, which I
think when you look at the issues that he really
leans into that are very popular, like immigration and deportation.
I think I've always said to folks Jeremy that if
the politics go bad for Donald Trump, the showmanship will
go up. We'll see deportations on TV every night, right
(31:10):
if people start really getting upset with this until he
maybe finally relents. And of course I think one strategy
could always be throwing Elon Musk himself under the bus potentially,
But no, I think that these town halls are the
first sign that this isn't what some people voted for.
I think also when you look at that special election
(31:31):
in Maine, an area in which Donald Trump won by
small percentage, but a Democrat winning there pretty decisively. So look,
I think that we have a lot to absorb here,
a lot to figure out. But I do think that
these town halls they're the first indication. But I think
I need to see a little bit more than that,
(31:51):
right because my questions about those town halls are is
that happening organically, Is that happening from outside groups? Is
that happening for people of Are those people speaking out
those town halls Trump supporters who've turned are those folks
who are always the liberal person in that area in
the district who didn't like any of this stuff anyway?
And I'm interested to see, particularly in some of these
states that rely so much on the federal Again, a
(32:14):
lot of your conservative, red Republican states are welfare states,
my homestate of Kentucky being one of them. Right Like,
as much as it might vote one way, it is
reliant on Illinois, California, and New York putting money into
this pot. And we all put money out of it
when we need it for disaster relief, for or medicai
or whatever else. And I have the feeling that these
(32:37):
town halls right now are the first signs of it.
But you're gonna need a monumental movement, particularly in the
first two I mean, he's only been in office six weeks,
so everyone who's like we need to put us it's
like he just got there.
Speaker 1 (32:51):
You are and will and let me ask you just
finally on that point, he's only been in office for
a matter of weeks. Is this just the beginning though?
In terms of the layoffs, are they gonna ramp up
or are we getting towards the end of them? Do
we have any sense of how far he's gonna go.
Speaker 3 (33:08):
I think this is just the beginning. We've already seen
my man Joy Wilker and Joey Garrison, one of our
White House reporters has written about this that there's already
been these warnings of a new round of more aggressive layoffs,
and I think you're going to see particularly some of
these more liberal pet projects and parts of liberal bureaucracy
that will be attacked and gone after and cut or
(33:31):
eliminated all together. The Department of Education. That's still the
open question. Will there even be a Department of Education
this year. I think that you're going to see the
Trump administration sort of figure this out. But I think
that the again, I'll go back to that void memo.
I think this is the point. I think that the Department
of Education's days are numbered. Personally, I just think that, like,
(33:53):
it's pretty clear from the political direction that this administration
is going, but it's also a question of when, right
not if. That's how I look at this, is that
we're going to pathodically go through each of these sectors
of the federal government and the parts that we may
find some actual waste from abuse in great but some
parts that we just find to be No. We won
(34:14):
the election and we don't want to put money into
this anymore. I mean that's the true message of that memo.
Things that we find that we find politically objectionable. We're
getting rid of them. And they may have been here
for ten twenty thirty years, but not on my watch.
And this president feels emboldened. I think this Congress has
emboldened him even further. And unless you mean you're seeing
(34:36):
some protests, and like you said, you mentioned the town halls,
but unless you see a monumental sort of pushback from
the American public. You know, in some of these polling numbers,
we're not there yet. We're not at sixty eight seventy
eighty percent of Americans to this.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
That is Philip Bailey, who is the chief local correspondent
for USA Today. Philip, thank you.
Speaker 3 (34:56):
So much, Jeremy, as always, and thanks.
Speaker 1 (34:58):
You for listening to One Thing Trump Did. It was
produced by Harrison Fatino. Our next middle episode is coming
to your podcast feeds later this week. It is a
conversation about trans rights, which of course have come under
attack since President Trump took office. And if you like
this podcast, please rate it wherever you get your podcast,
tell your friends and sign up for automatic downloads. Our
theme music was composed by Noah Haidu. I'm Jeremy Hobson
(35:21):
Talk to you soon.
Host
Jeremy Hobson
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com