After twenty years in the armed services, followed by twenty years as a contractor supporting the armed services, I’ve had a great deal of experience with the federal bureaucracy.  So when I heard Vivek Ramaswamy suggest we have a RIF (reduction in force) of the civil service of 50%, I was shocked.  I thought it would be impossible.  I felt that far too much is asked of the government to reduce the civil service by that much.

But then I started reflecting on my own experience in government and contracting to the government.

What I recognized is that when there’s a low-performing civil servant, it can take years to build a case for his termination.  And even then, a simple clerical error can derail the process, forcing you to start all over.

However, I’ve seen contractors removed in days, if not hours.  That threat of losing the contract forces the companies to ensure that their employees are performing.  Furthermore, contractors allow quicker expansion and contraction as needed.  If a project is canceled for whatever reason, the support contracts are immediately terminated without worrying about what to do with civilian personnel.  This also permits the directors and commanders to expand or contract their manpower as needed as long as the funding is approved.

The use of contractors over civil servants has the potential of being far more efficient and cost-effective.  Many government services can be performed by support contractors rather than civil servants.

With the shutdown, President Trump has the opportunity follow Ramaswamy’s suggestion and reduce the bloated civil service.  But I’m beginning to think Vivek was thinking too small.  President Trump should consider removing two thirds, if not three fourths.

Image: Tool Dude8mm via Flickr, CC BY 2.0.