The National Plant Germplasm System, a vast federal collection of seeds, roots, branches and stems, is probably unknown to most Americans. But to Rachel Spaeth the system is a “living library” — and America’s safeguard against “famine on a global scale.”
Dr. Spaeth was a horticulturalist at an Agriculture Department research site near Davis, Calif., where she oversaw 7,000 trees that produce “stone fruits,” including apricots, cherries, peaches, plums, prunes and nectarines. Her mission: to keep the plants healthy and genetically diverse, so breeders can produce disease-resistant strains.
She was fired two weeks ago.
The extraordinary campaign underway by President Trump and his right-hand man, Elon Musk, to shrink what the administration calls a “bloated, corrupt federal bureaucracy” has targeted a growing list of often obscure scientists, engineers and other specialists whose expertise has helped form the backbone of the modern federal government and positioned the United States as a research leader in the world.
The slash-and-burn purge, which is expected to grow in the coming weeks, is alarming even to some conservatives who worry that the indiscriminate nature of the firing will ultimately undermine core government operations.
At the same time, it highlights fundamental questions about the size, shape and function of the federal bureaucracy. Should it be pared back? And if so, by how much? Which functions are necessary and which are superfluous? The Trump administration has already conceded it has made mistakes in its handling of some experts, who have been rehired, including specialists on bird flu and workers at the National Nuclear Security Administration.
The wave of departures so far — some forced, some voluntary — includes endangered species biologists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; meteorologists at the National Weather Service, the head of the New England office of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; a chemical engineer working on renewable energy; an autism expert at the National Institute for Mental Health; and a Food and Drug Administration microbiologist, to name a few.
“Wildlife biologists, research horticulturists, chemical engineers, these are highly educated people who are doing very bright things,” said Rachel Greszler, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, the organization behind Project 2025, a blueprint drafted by Trump allies for overhauling the federal government. “But the question is, are they doing things that are the purpose of the federal government?”
Modern presidents at least since Ronald Reagan have raised questions about the proper role, size and shape of the federal government. After famously declaring that “government is the problem,” Mr. Reagan instructed agencies to begin “reductions in force.” In 1993, President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, issued an executive order calling for the elimination of 100,000 federal jobs — albeit slowly, over three years.
But the Trump-Musk plan is something else entirely — an extraordinary moment of reckoning for how the United States is governed, and a direct challenge to the decades-old effort to build a civil service stocked with experts on a wide range of topics.
It is being carried out by an administration that views much of the government as a bastion of anti-Trump liberalism. Russell T. Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget and a Project 2025 architect, said in a memo issued last month on the job cuts that “tax dollars are being siphoned off to fund unproductive and unnecessary programs that benefit radical interest groups while hurting hardworking American citizens.”
A spokeswoman for the federal Office of Personnel Management, McLaurine Pinover, said in an email that the Trump administration has “created a thoughtful, phased process” that will “will reduce unnecessary waste and bloat while continuing to deliver high-quality services.” Mr. Trump, in ordering the force reductions, has carved out exceptions for jobs related to public safety and immigration enforcement.
But Anthony Mills, director of the Center for Technology, Science and Energy at the libertarian-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said the firings do not appear part of a considered policy agenda driven by a “well articulated set of principles” about the appropriate role of government.
“It seems to me that the motivating factor here is punishment,” he said. “It’s a form of assertive action designed to bring a set of institutions ideologically to heel.” He added that a federal brain drain could hurt Mr. Trump’s ability to govern, saying, “You don’t want to lose the most competent people.”
So far, more than 20,000 employees have been fired from dozens of federal departments and agencies, according to a New York Times database. Many others have left of their own volition, either by quitting in protest or by accepting Mr. Musk’s “fork in the road” offer, as did more than 700 National Park Service employees, according to an internal memo sent Tuesday. It is not known how many of those departures include scientists or other experts.
Dr. Spaeth, who has a doctorate in historical breeding and genetics and was hired to replace two people — including a molecular geneticist — was commended in an internal newsletter after her firing.
“I had received an award and I got a shout-out four days after I got fired,” she said. “So that’s hilarious.”
Jacob Malcom, an endangered species biologist, rose to the level of acting deputy assistant secretary at the Department of Interior, overseeing about 200 people. But he resigned under protest, he said, after the Trump administration forced him to sign termination notices for “poor performance,” with no evidence to support it. One fired Interior Department employee was working to save the alligator snapping turtle, the largest freshwater turtle in the United States.
“We have bald eagles around today because there were endangered species biologists all those decades ago who figured out, ‘This is how we save bald eagles,’” said Dr. Malcom, whose doctoral research focused on ecology and evolution. “If these people are being terminated, are we going to lose these species forever?”
The government employs roughly 2.3 million civilian workers, not including federal contractors. According to a 2023 analysis survey by the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, 53 percent of civil servants have either a bachelors or an advanced degree, compared to 40 percent of the entire U.S. work force.
“It’s a very, very educated and expert work force,” said Max Stier, the group’s president. “There are people who have developed extraordinary depth in areas of science and even technology that are frankly impossible to find otherwise, or to replicate.”
Lindsey Nielsen, a microbiologist and lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserves, said she had just been promoted at the F.D.A. when she received notification that she was being terminated for “poor performance.” Working remotely from a small town in central Nebraska, she reviewed the development of laboratory tests for pathogens like influenza and Covid-19. But her promotion put her in “probationary” status, which made her vulnerable to dismissal.
“I am very concerned that we’re going to be having a huge scientific gap,” she said.
Cara Pugliese, a clinical psychologist and program officer at the National Institute of Mental Health, oversaw research on treatments for children on the autism spectrum — a high priority for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new health secretary. She was recruited a year ago from Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, and fired 344 days into her yearlong probationary period.
“Life as a woman in science and academia is brutal, but I was part of a mission-driven community — one that fights for fundamental human rights and values differences as assets, not liabilities,” she wrote on Facebook, in a post that has been shared 33,000 times.
Dr. Joshua Gordon, the former director of the mental health institute, said that Dr. Pugliese worked with scientists to identify research gaps and steer tax dollars toward unmet needs. The job requires sophisticated knowledge. “People like her are not easy to come by,” he said. “It can take a year or more for us to recruit the right person.”
While Mr. Vought, of the Office of Management and Budget, referred to federal money helping “radical interest groups,” some critics who could hardly be described as radical are pushing back.
The Nebraska Cattlemen’s Association warned that the firing of scientists and statisticians working in the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center in Nebraska would gut research that could “reduce costs for the beef industry long term and improve food safety for consumers.”
Representative Don Bacon, Republican of Nebraska, agreed. “DOGE needs to measure twice and cut once,” he said, referring to Mr. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, which is leading the effort to shrink the federal work force.
A spokeswoman for the Beet Sugar Development Foundation said the dismissal of horticulturalists like Dr. Spaeth was a threat to “the long-term future of agriculture and to the security of our food systems.”
Some fired experts have been rehired. Summaira Riaz, who led a team of researchers to breed grapes, almonds and other fruit for disease resistance, was brought back after her superiors and partners in the agriculture industry argued for it.
Dr. Spaeth, though, is still out of work. She hopes to “pick up teaching gigs,” and already has an offer to work with a nursery. But she is worried about her collection — especially the almonds, because the Agricultural Research service has also lost its almond breeder and the industry is facing a new disease threat: “red leaf blotch.”
If the collection “goes into full decline,” Dr. Spaeth said, the almond industry will take a hit. When she arrived last year, she said, the collection was backsliding, and orchards were overgrown. She brought in volunteers and students to clear out weeds and brush.
“We do a lot with duct tape and chicken wire,” she said. “It’s not like we’re all fat on the hog over here, wasting taxpayer dollars.”
