Imagine dedicating your life to serving your country, only to be unceremoniously pushed aside. This is the harsh reality for thousands of federal workers under the Trump administration. Liz Goggin, a seasoned clinical social worker, and Mahri Stainnak, a dedicated diversity advocate, found themselves at the mercy of a political upheaval that upended their careers and lives. But their stories are just the tip of the iceberg in a mass exodus that has seen over 317,000 federal employees leave their posts by the end of 2025. And this is the part most people miss: It’s not just about job loss—it’s about the erosion of public service as we know it.
Goggin, who spent a decade helping veterans navigate the complexities of the Veterans Health Administration, recently had an encounter that brought her past role into sharp focus. While out for ice cream with her kids, she met a veteran struggling with housing and health issues. In the past, she would have seamlessly connected him with vital services. But now, she could only offer advice—a stark reminder of what she’d left behind. After being twice rejected for a buyout offer, Goggin quit her job in June, feeling the weight of a system that no longer valued her expertise. But here’s where it gets controversial: Was this a necessary shake-up, as Trump claims, or a reckless dismantling of essential services?
The Trump administration’s crackdown on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives has been particularly polarizing. Stainnak, who worked in the Office of Personnel Management’s DEI office, was fired shortly after Trump’s return to the White House. Their crime? Helping veterans, people with disabilities, and recent graduates—including those from minority-serving institutions—find careers in the federal workforce. Today, Stainnak is part of a class-action lawsuit alleging illegal discrimination, arguing that the administration targeted employees based on their race, gender, or perceived political beliefs. Is this a justified reform, or a dangerous step backward?
Trump’s supporters argue he’s saving the country from waste and inefficiency, but critics like Max Stier, founding president of the Partnership for Public Service, warn of a return to a patronage system reminiscent of the 1800s. Here’s a thought-provoking question: Are we witnessing a necessary correction, or are we sacrificing the public good for political gain?
For workers like Keri Murphy, who was fired as part of a chaotic purge of probationary employees, the impact is deeply personal. Despite a court ruling that the firings were illegal, Murphy remains out of work, struggling to make ends meet. Her story highlights the human cost of these policies—a cost that often gets lost in the political rhetoric.
Goggin and Stainnak, though thriving in new roles, remain wistful about their time in public service. Goggin’s private therapy practice is booming, but she still checks the government’s hiring portal, hoping for a return to the work she loves. Stainnak, despite their struggles, remains committed to fighting for justice. What does this say about the state of public service today?
As we grapple with these stories, one thing is clear: The future of federal employment—and the very idea of serving the American people—hangs in the balance. What do you think? Is Trump’s approach a necessary overhaul, or a dangerous dismantling of public service? Share your thoughts in the comments—let’s keep this conversation going.
