Last updated 2 months ago. Our resources are updated regularly but please keep in mind that links, programs, policies, and contact information do change.
The United States federal government operates with over 2 million civilian employees. These workers fall into two distinct categories that serve very different purposes: career civil servants and political appointees.
Career civil servants make up the vast majority—over 2 million people who work across administrations regardless of which party holds power. Political appointees number only about 4,000 but wield enormous influence as they set policy direction and manage agencies according to the President’s agenda.
The tension between permanent expertise and political responsiveness reflects a fundamental challenge in democratic governance: how do you maintain skilled, impartial administration while ensuring government remains accountable to voters?
The Civil Service System: Merit Over Politics
From Corruption to Competence
Before 1883, federal jobs went to political supporters rather than qualified candidates. This “spoils system” meant each new president could replace government workers with party loyalists, regardless of their abilities.
The system was deeply corrupt. Political appointees were expected to contribute portions of their salaries to the party that hired them. Quality suffered as unqualified cronies filled important positions. Mark Twain complained about “ignoramuses” running government offices.
Everything changed after President James Garfield’s assassination in 1881. His killer, Charles Guiteau, was a mentally unstable man who believed he deserved a government job for supporting Garfield’s campaign. This tragedy exposed the dangers of the spoils system and created unstoppable momentum for reform.
The Pendleton Act Revolution
Congress passed the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act in 1883, creating the foundation of today’s merit-based system. The law established three revolutionary principles:
Competitive Examinations: Jobs went to candidates who proved their qualifications through testing, not political connections.
Protection from Political Firing: Covered employees couldn’t be removed for political reasons, providing job security that encouraged honest, impartial work.
Independent Oversight: The Civil Service Commission would enforce these new rules and protect against political interference.
Initially covering only 10% of federal positions, the act allowed presidents to gradually expand its reach. Today, about 90% of federal jobs are covered by merit-based hiring.
The reform had unexpected consequences. By ending the practice of political appointees paying “assessments” to their party, it forced political organizations to find new funding sources—leading to today’s system of wealthy donors and interest group contributions.
Core Principles of Modern Civil Service
Today’s civil service operates on fundamental principles designed to ensure fairness and effectiveness:
Merit-Based Hiring: Federal jobs go to the most qualified candidates through fair, open competition. This attracts talent from all backgrounds and ensures competence over connections.
Equal Treatment: All employees and applicants receive fair treatment regardless of political beliefs, race, religion, gender, or other personal characteristics.
Equal Pay for Equal Work: Compensation reflects job difficulty and responsibility, not favoritism or political considerations.
Ethical Standards: Civil servants maintain high integrity and conduct standards, always prioritizing public interest over personal or political gain.
Protection from Political Pressure: Employees are shielded from arbitrary actions, favoritism, and partisan coercion. The Hatch Act limits their political activities to maintain neutrality.
Organizations like Civil Service Strong report that 95% of Americans believe civil servants should be hired based on merit and qualifications, not political views.
The Purpose Behind Merit
The civil service system serves democracy by ensuring government operations continue smoothly regardless of political changes. Career employees provide institutional memory, technical expertise, and operational continuity that transcends electoral cycles.
Civil servants take an oath to uphold the Constitution rather than serve any particular president or party. This creates a workforce whose primary loyalty is to the law and the American people rather than political leadership.
Ensuring Effective Government: Professional, skilled workers deliver public services efficiently and implement complex programs competently.
Providing Stability: Government operations continue uninterrupted during transitions between administrations, preventing chaos and maintaining essential services.
Upholding the Rule of Law: Career employees serve as a check against political whims that might violate legal requirements or constitutional principles.
Supporting Democratic Governance: An impartial civil service protects democracy by ensuring government serves all citizens fairly rather than just political supporters.
Who Are Civil Servants and What Do They Do?
Federal civil servants work across hundreds of agencies performing every conceivable government function. Most work under the General Schedule (GS) pay system, with grades from GS-1 (entry level) to GS-15 (senior specialist or supervisor).
The Senior Executive Service (SES) includes the government’s top career managers and executives, positioned just below political appointees. These leaders bridge political leadership and the career workforce.
The Hiring Process
Most federal jobs are filled through the Competitive Service via USAJOBS.gov, the government’s official job board. Applicants compete based on knowledge, skills, and abilities assessed through examinations, experience evaluation, or structured interviews.
Some positions fall under the Excepted Service, which allows more flexible hiring for specialized roles like attorneys, scientists, or positions requiring security clearances.
Daily Functions
Civil servants translate laws and policies into real-world programs and services:
Environmental Protection Agency staff develop regulations, conduct research, and enforce environmental laws across different administrations, adapting to changing priorities while maintaining technical expertise.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention professionals track disease outbreaks, conduct research, and manage public health programs regardless of political leadership.
Social Security Administration employees process millions of benefit applications and payments, ensuring Americans receive earned benefits consistently.
National Park Service rangers and scientists manage and protect national parks, maintaining conservation standards across changing political priorities.
Food and Drug Administration reviewers evaluate drug safety and inspect facilities based on scientific standards rather than political considerations.
Civil servants “faithfully implement administration policies consistent with their constitutional oath.” This requires balancing loyalty to current leadership with adherence to law and professional standards.
Accountability and Protection
The civil service balances accountability with protection against political abuse.
Accountability Mechanisms
Civil servants report to agency leadership and are ultimately accountable to the President, Congress, and the public. Performance appraisal systems evaluate job performance, and disciplinary procedures exist for misconduct or poor performance.
The Office of Personnel Management requires agencies to maintain accountability systems ensuring personnel practices follow merit principles and provide correction for deficiencies.
Protection Systems
Strong protections shield civil servants from political pressure and arbitrary actions:
The Merit Systems Protection Board adjudicates appeals from employees facing adverse actions like removal or suspension.
The Office of Special Counsel investigates prohibited personnel practices and protects whistleblowers from retaliation.
The Whistleblower Protection Act provides specific safeguards for employees reporting waste, fraud, or abuse.
These protections ensure civil servants can provide honest, objective advice without fearing political retaliation. However, critics argue they sometimes make removing poor performers too difficult, creating tension between protection and accountability.
Political Appointments: Democratic Control
Defining Political Appointees
The Office of Government Ethics defines political appointees as employees appointed by the President, Vice President, or agency heads outside the competitive civil service system.
About 4,000 political appointees serve at any time—a small fraction of the federal workforce but wielding enormous influence. Of these, roughly 1,200 require Senate confirmation. These numbers are higher than most other democracies, reflecting America’s extensive system of political control over the bureaucracy.
The Plum Book published after each presidential election lists all these policy and supporting positions available to incoming administrations.
From Patronage to Strategic Placement
Political appointments have deep historical roots. George Washington emphasized “fitness” for jobs while considering political alignment to ensure government stability.
The spoils system dominated from Andrew Jackson’s presidency through the 1880s, when appointments primarily rewarded political supporters and built party strength.
The Pendleton Act ended widespread patronage for most jobs but preserved the president’s need for loyal policy-makers in key positions. Modern political appointments evolved from pure patronage toward strategic placement of individuals who share the president’s vision and possess skills to implement it.
Types of Political Appointments
Political appointments form a clear hierarchy of influence and public scrutiny:
| Appointment Type | Number | Process | Typical Roles |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presidential Appointments with Senate Confirmation (PAS) | ~1,200 | President nominates, Senate confirms | Cabinet Secretaries, agency heads, ambassadors, U.S. Attorneys |
| Presidential Appointments (PA) | ~500 | President appoints directly | Senior White House staff, policy advisors, “czars” |
| Non-career Senior Executive Service (NA) | ~750 | Agency heads appoint with White House approval | Senior managers linking political leadership to career staff |
| Schedule C | ~1,400 | Agency heads appoint with White House approval | Confidential assistants, policy advisors, special assistants |
Presidential Appointments with Senate Confirmation (PAS)
These are the most visible and powerful positions. Cabinet secretaries like the Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense, agency administrators, ambassadors, and U.S. Attorneys all require Senate confirmation under the Constitution’s “advice and consent” clause.
Presidential Appointments (PA)
Most senior White House staff don’t require Senate confirmation, allowing presidents to quickly install trusted advisors in key roles. This includes policy coordinators, communications staff, and special assistants.
Non-career Senior Executive Service (NA)
Up to 10% of SES positions can be filled by political appointees who serve as crucial links between political leadership and career staff. They provide political direction while working closely with career managers.
Schedule C Appointments
These “confidential or policy-determining” positions support other political appointees. Special assistants, policy advisors, and confidential secretaries ensure political appointees have trusted staff to implement their agenda.
The Appointment Process
The path to political appointment varies significantly by position type.
White House Personnel Office Role
The Presidential Personnel Office within the White House manages most appointments. It identifies candidates, conducts initial vetting, and recommends individuals to the president.
The Vetting Process
Prospective appointees, especially for senior positions, undergo extensive background checks including FBI investigations, financial disclosure reviews by the Office of Government Ethics, and scrutiny of tax records, publications, and legal proceedings.
This rigorous process reflects strong concerns about preventing corruption and conflicts of interest among those wielding significant political power.
Senate Confirmation
For PAS positions, the president’s nomination goes to the Senate for confirmation. The process includes committee hearings where nominees answer questions about qualifications and policy views, committee votes on recommendations, and final Senate votes requiring simple majorities.
This process can be highly politicized and time-consuming, especially when the president’s party doesn’t control the Senate. Delays can leave critical positions vacant for months.
Recess Appointments
The Constitution allows presidents to make temporary appointments when the Senate is in recess. However, Supreme Court rulings have limited this power to recesses of 10 days or longer, and Senate scheduling practices have made such appointments increasingly rare.
Roles and Accountability
Political appointees provide policy direction aligned with the president’s agenda and ensure agencies respond to electoral mandates.
Key Responsibilities
Policy Direction: Developing and implementing policies consistent with administration priorities.
Agency Leadership: Managing departments, budgets, personnel, and programs.
Democratic Responsiveness: Ensuring agency actions reflect the will of elected leadership and, ultimately, voters.
Public Representation: Serving as stewards of taxpayer resources and upholding constitutional principles.
Accountability Mechanisms
To the President: Most appointees serve “at the pleasure of the President” and can be removed at any time, ensuring direct accountability to elected leadership.
Ethics Requirements: Appointees face stringent ethics laws including financial disclosure, conflict avoidance, and post-employment restrictions.
Congressional Oversight: Congress exercises oversight through hearings, investigations, and budget control.
Public Scrutiny: High-profile appointees face intense media and public attention.
Some regulatory positions have fixed terms and “for cause” removal protections to ensure independence from direct presidential control, reflecting legislative intent to balance accountability with impartiality in certain functions.
Comparing the Two Systems
The civil service and political appointment systems serve different but complementary purposes in American governance:
| Feature | Civil Servants | Political Appointees |
|---|---|---|
| Hiring Basis | Merit (competitive exams, qualifications) | Political loyalty, policy alignment, presidential discretion |
| Primary Purpose | Competent, impartial administration and continuity | Implement president’s agenda, ensure political responsiveness |
| Tenure | Career/permanent across administrations | Generally tied to appointing administration |
| Accountability | To law, merit principles, public interest | Primarily to president or appointing official |
| Removal Protection | Strong (due process, just cause required) | Few or none (most serve “at pleasure”) |
| Workforce Size | Over 2 million | Approximately 4,000 |
| Authority Source | Pendleton Act, Civil Service Reform Act, Title 5 | Constitution, presidential discretion |
Strengths and Weaknesses
Civil Service Strengths
Expertise and Competence: Merit-based hiring ensures qualified workers with necessary skills for complex government tasks.
Continuity and Stability: Career employees provide institutional memory and smooth operations across political transitions.
Reduced Corruption: Merit systems minimize political favoritism and patronage opportunities.
Impartiality: Civil servants provide politically neutral advice based on evidence and professional judgment.
Civil Service Challenges
Potential Inflexibility: Job protections and established procedures can sometimes create resistance to change or new policy directions.
Responsiveness Concerns: Insulation from political pressure, while protecting integrity, may reduce direct accountability to elected officials.
Hiring Complexity: Fair competition procedures can be lengthy and complex, slowing recruitment.
Performance Management: Strong protections can make addressing poor performance time-consuming and difficult.
Political Appointment Strengths
Democratic Responsiveness: Ensures agencies respond to the policy agenda of elected leadership.
Policy Implementation: Allows presidents to place trusted individuals in key positions to drive their initiatives.
Fresh Perspectives: Appointees bring new ideas and external expertise that can challenge bureaucratic inertia.
Clear Accountability: Direct presidential control creates clear lines of responsibility.
Political Appointment Challenges
Turnover and Instability: Short tenures and frequent changes can disrupt agency management and planning.
Experience Gaps: Some appointees may lack deep subject expertise or public management experience.
Performance Issues: Research suggests high numbers of appointees or frequent vacancies can hurt agency performance.
Politicization Risk: Appointees may prioritize partisan goals over agency missions or public interest.
The Working Dynamic
Effective government requires political appointees and civil servants to work together productively. Ideally, appointees provide policy direction and democratic accountability while civil servants offer expertise, institutional knowledge, and implementation capacity.
However, tensions often arise from different perspectives and priorities:
Timeline Differences: Appointees operate on electoral cycles while civil servants think in longer institutional terms.
Loyalty vs. Neutrality: Appointees may question civil servant loyalty while career staff may feel pressure to compromise professional judgment.
Policy Disagreements: Career expertise may conflict with appointee preferences, creating friction even when offered in good faith.
Trust serves as the foundation for productive relationships. When both groups respect each other’s roles and communicate openly, government functions effectively. When trust erodes, agency performance and public service quality suffer.
Organizations like the Partnership for Public Service provide training and resources to improve collaboration between political and career leaders.
Current Challenges and Future Directions
The Schedule F Controversy
Recent debates about “Schedule F” highlight fundamental tensions between political control and civil service protection.
What is Schedule F?
Schedule F was a new employee classification created by the Trump administration in October 2020 that would have reclassified tens of thousands of career civil servants in “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating” positions.
Employees moved to Schedule F would have lost traditional civil service protections against political removal, effectively becoming at-will employees like political appointees.
President Biden rescinded the order in January 2021, but proposals to revive similar concepts continue in policy discussions. The Office of Personnel Management estimated up to 50,000 positions could potentially be affected.
Arguments For and Against
Supporters argue Schedule F would:
- Increase accountability of policy-making employees to the elected president
- Address instances where career employees resist lawful presidential directives
- Ensure the executive branch implements the administration’s agenda effectively
Critics contend it would:
- Massively politicize the civil service, undermining 140 years of merit-based principles
- Replace expertise with political loyalty in hiring and firing decisions
- Cause significant loss of institutional knowledge as experienced professionals leave
- Increase political favoritism in government actions like contract awards
- Erode objective, non-partisan advice to policymakers
Organizations like Civil Service Strong actively oppose such measures, providing legal support and advocacy to protect merit-based principles.
Potential Agency Impacts
Schedule F could dramatically affect specific agencies:
At the Social Security Administration, which currently has very few political appointees, reclassification could destabilize an agency already facing staffing challenges and potentially compromise benefit delivery to millions.
In the National Park Service, reclassifying park superintendents could prioritize political considerations over conservation expertise, potentially harming stewardship of national treasures.
Balancing Effectiveness and Accountability
The ongoing challenge is optimizing the interaction between civil service expertise and political responsiveness to achieve effective, accountable governance.
This balance isn’t static—different administrations and political philosophies will have different perspectives on where it should lie, reflecting broader views about executive branch power and democratic accountability.
Key Challenges
Political Polarization: Increasing partisan division makes collaboration between appointees and civil servants more difficult.
Talent Management: Attracting and retaining top talent for both systems remains challenging, particularly in specialized fields where federal pay may not compete with private sector compensation.
Reform Impact: Any changes must preserve core principles of merit, expertise, and impartiality while addressing legitimate concerns about responsiveness and flexibility.
Oversight and Accountability
Multiple entities help maintain system integrity:
The Office of Personnel Management oversees civil service policy and administration.
The Merit Systems Protection Board provides independent adjudication of personnel appeals.
The Office of Special Counsel investigates prohibited practices and protects whistleblowers.
The Government Accountability Office evaluates government performance and spending effectiveness.
External organizations also play crucial roles. Civil Service Strong advocates for merit-based principles, the Partnership for Public Service promotes effective government leadership, and USAFacts provides accessible data about government operations.
The Importance of Public Understanding
An informed citizenry is essential for maintaining effective government staffing systems. Public understanding of civil service and political appointment roles enables meaningful participation in debates about government structure and reform.
Citizens who understand these systems can better assess government performance, hold officials accountable, and participate constructively in democratic processes. Whether evaluating news about agency actions, advocating for policy changes, or simply understanding how government works, informed citizens strengthen democratic governance.
The tension between permanent expertise and political responsiveness will continue evolving as American democracy faces new challenges. Success requires maintaining both systems’ strengths while addressing their weaknesses through thoughtful reform rather than wholesale transformation.
The relationship between civil servants and political appointees—with its built-in tensions and complementary functions—exemplifies how American governance balances effective execution with democratic accountability. Understanding this balance helps citizens engage more effectively with their government and ensure it serves the public interest across changing political landscapes.
The federal workforce serves all Americans regardless of political affiliation. Both career civil servants and political appointees take oaths to uphold the Constitution and serve the public interest. Their success in working together effectively determines how well government serves its citizens and maintains the trust essential for democratic governance.
Our articles make government information more accessible. Please consult a qualified professional for financial, legal, or health advice specific to your circumstances.