Democrats on the House Surveillance and Government Reform Committee are urging Chairman James Comer (R-KY) to summon President Trump’s Budget Director, Russell Vought, to testify about his controversial plan to expand federal layoffs during the government shutdown.
In a letter sent Thursday, Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), who represents a district home to nearly 60,000 federal workers, argued that Vought’s actions are illegal. He expressed a desire to address the committee regarding the threat of mass firings linked to the shutdown, suggesting these layoffs have historically accompanied such closures.
“The director has caused significant chaos within the federal government through his delayed resignation and his role in enforcing unnecessary budget cuts,” Walkinshaw stated in his letter to Comer. “Now, he has further escalated the situation by unlawfully threatening mass layoffs of federal employees, which directly violates the Reactivity Act and jeopardizes government operations.”
The oversight committee’s spokesperson did not dismiss the possibility of bringing Vought before the panel. “Democrats shouldn’t need hearings to see that their shutdown is bad for federal workers and American citizens. They can end this shutdown by supporting clean funding proposals already approved by the House,” the spokesperson wrote in an email.
Last week, Vought sent a memo directing federal agencies to brace for layoffs if the government shuts down. Following the shutdown’s start on Wednesday, he held a call with Republican lawmakers, indicating the layoffs could happen by the week’s end, potentially affecting “thousands” of federal workers, according to White House press secretary Carolyn Leavitt.
This threat has been interpreted as a strategy to persuade Senate Democrats to concede to the Republican spending bill required to reopen the government. So far, Democrats have resisted, arguing that the Trump administration has been laying off federal workers consistently throughout the year and would likely continue to do so, regardless of any shutdowns.
If these firings occur, they would contradict typical government shutdown protocols, where affected employees generally receive compensation once Congress reaches an agreement to reopen. Walkinshaw believes any mass layoffs conducted during the shutdown would face legal challenges, predicting that the administration would not prevail in court. He argued that pursuing mass layoffs during a funding freeze violates laws that limit federal spending to allocated amounts.
In an MSNBC op-ed published Tuesday, Walkinshaw elaborated on the legal implications of executing mass layoffs during a government shutdown, mentioning potential administrative burdens and obligations related to employee pensions and benefits.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) defended Vought, asserting that he possesses the authority to enforce layoffs and cut spending during the shutdown. “The White House agencies may not prefer this, but they will prioritize their principles over other considerations,” Johnson remarked to reporters.
He suggested that Vought was reluctantly trimming federal spending due to the shutdown imposed by Democrats. “He doesn’t want to do this,” he added.
Meanwhile, Trump seems to be relishing the situation, using the shutdown to implement budget cuts targeting programs backed by Democrats. In a post on social media, he announced a meeting with Vought to discuss which “democratic institutions” would face cuts, commenting on the opportunity presented by the left’s actions.
This statement led to accusations from Democrats that the administration was leveraging the shutdown to push its long-held agenda against federal programs, even if it violated legal standards.
Walkinshaw emphasized the need for Vought to present his plans directly to Congress and the public under oath, implying that his actions warranted scrutiny. “If Vought has time for partisan calls with Republican Congress members, he should also be prepared to explain his approach to Congress and the American people,” he wrote to Comer, calling for accountability amidst this unusual situation.
