Merit vs. Tenure: Reforming Federal Firing

Merit vs. Tenure: Reforming Federal Firing

Today we have a special repeat guest, Scott Kupor [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Kupor], Director of the Office of Personnel Management [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_Personnel_Management] (OPM). The OPM is the people function in the federal government — the department that sets the rules for the various HR departments in other agencies. Director Kupor was on Statecraft six months ago [https://www.statecraft.pub/p/998-of-federal-employees-get-good], and is now a little more seasoned in the federal government. We discuss: * How veterans’ preference works in federal hiring * Who gets fired first when an agency conducts a Reduction In Force (RIF) * Proposed changes to prioritize performance during RIFs * Kupor’s progress in recruiting early career and tech talent to government The full transcript for this conversation is at www.statecraft.pub [http://www.statecraft.pub] This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub [https://www.statecraft.pub?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

"The Strongman Presidency"

On today’s episode, we’re continuing a conversation about presidential power that we broached a couple of weeks ago on Statecraft in an essay called, “What Trump Can Learn From Nixon [https://www.statecraft.pub/p/what-trump-can-learn-from-nixon].” It was about the attempts, in Richard Nixon [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon]‘s one and a half presidential terms, to build what observers called the “administrative presidency” — the presidency that actually fully controlled the administrative state. My guests today have thought very deeply about presidential attempts to control the administrative state. William Howell [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Howell] and Terry Moe [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_M._Moe] are co-authors of a book called, Trajectory of Power: The Rise of the Strongman Presidency [https://www.amazon.com/Trajectory-Power-Rise-Strongman-Presidency/dp/069127617X/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Ifb2g7VU_xSnQvT4QNQWFQ.AtUNMIOrN8DtclWdIfTQTWPv1glwoP4ExwSp54woYHk&dib_tag=se&keywords=The+Trajectory+of+Power%3A+The+Rise+of+the+Strongman+Presidency&nsdOptOutParam=true&qid=1779974279&sr=8-1]. They’re both political scientists. Terry is a professor of political science at Stanford [https://www.stanford.edu/], and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution [https://www.hoover.org/]. Will is the Dean of the School of Government and Policy [https://sgp.jhu.edu/] at Johns Hopkins University [https://www.jhu.edu/]. We discuss: * Why most federal employees in the 1800s were mailmen, and what changed * How presidents have tried to control the administrative state * Whether Republicans have used presidential power to rein in agencies they object to * Whether the Supreme Court has been a firewall against Trump For the full transcript of this conversation, go to http://www.statecraft.pubwww.statecraft.pub [http://www.statecraft.pub]. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub [https://www.statecraft.pub?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

How the National Security Strategy Gets Made

In the last six months, we’ve been covering big strategic documents published by the executive branch. We’ve interviewed Dean Ball [https://www.statecraft.pub/p/how-the-trump-white-house-really], the principal author of the Trump administration’s AI Action Plan [https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Americas-AI-Action-Plan.pdf]. We’ve also spoken with Judd Devermont [https://www.statecraft.pub/p/how-diplomacy-works-in-africa], who authored the Biden administration’s Strategy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa [https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/U.S.-Strategy-Toward-Sub-Saharan-Africa-FINAL.pdf]. We’re continuing the trend today, but at a higher strategic register. I’m joined by Nadia Schadlow [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadia_Schadlow], the former Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategy in the first Trump administration and lead architect of the 2017 National Security Strategy [https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf]. Currently, Nadia is a senior fellow [https://www.hudson.org/experts/1244-nadia-schadlow] at the Hudson Institute [https://www.hudson.org/] where she focuses on strategy, national security, and industrial policy. We discuss: * The process of drafting the National Security Strategy * The differences between the 2017 and 2025 strategies * Why time is an underappreciated element of strategy * What to read to understand Russia better For the full transcript of this conversation, go to http://www.statecraft.pubwww.statecraft.pub [http://www.statecraft.pub]. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub [https://www.statecraft.pub?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

Ten Thoughts on Government Data

Government data often underpins policy debates. Nevertheless, those who work with it will know how uniquely frustrating it can be. Relative to the private sector, government systems collect data in idiosyncratic ways. They prioritize continuity and legality over ease-of-use, in anticipation of a narrow set of users. As a result, these datasets can feel impenetrable. In October 2024, I was trying to understand how international students enter the US workforce: where they move for work, how many of them use programs like Optional Practical Training, and whether they stay in the US after graduating. So, I opened up a dataset from the Department of Homeland Security’s Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). Today this data is available on the OPT Observatory [https://optobservatory.org/]; it’s the most granular public resource available to answer these questions. But it took me over a year to produce. The process of getting there taught me as much about government data as it did anything else. For the full transcript of this conversation, go to http://www.statecraft.pubwww.statecraft.pub [http://www.statecraft.pub]. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub [https://www.statecraft.pub?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

When FAFSA Broke, They Called This Guy

Jeremy Singer [https://about.collegeboard.org/leadership/jeremy-singer] is the President of College Board [https://www.collegeboard.org/], which he has led for over a decade. In that role, he oversees the SAT, AP, and other core elements of the U.S. college access ecosystem, and he’s previously had leadership roles at Kaplan [https://kaplan.com/] and McGraw Hill Education [https://www.mheducation.com/]. Why is Jeremy on Statecraft today? After the failed redesign of FAFSA in 2023, he spent six months at the Department of Education [https://www.ed.gov/] helping to ensure the 2024 launch was successful. The revised application form meant 1.7 million students were eligible [https://www.ncan.org/news/719093/FAFSA-Simplification-Yielded-1.7-Million-Additional-Pell-Eligible-Students.htm] for maximum Pell Grants [https://studentaid.gov/understand-aid/types/grants/pell] in the 2025-26 application cycle. We discuss: * Why attempts to simplify FAFSA went so badly wrong * The problems caused by precise drafting in Congress * How Singer got FAFSA back on track * What politicians and GAO don’t understand about developing software The full transcript for this conversation is at http://www.statecraft.pubwww.statecraft.pub. [http://www.statecraft.pub.] This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub [https://www.statecraft.pub?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]