Every third Monday in February, Americans observe Presidents’ Day, primarily honoring George Washington. This year, the “50501” movement, comprising leftist activists, organized protests against the consolidation of power under Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Demonstrators expressed fears of job losses amid government layoffs, sharing personal stories of anxiety and loss. Many civil servants, feeling threatened, conceal their dissenting views while warning that the current climate could damage public trust and deter future government employment.
Understanding the Significance of Presidents’ Day
Every third Monday in February, Americans come together to observe “Presidents’ Day,” a holiday that primarily honors the birth of George Washington, one of the nation’s founding figures. This year, however, the mood is different for members of the young “50501” movement, a group of leftist activists. The name “50501” represents their mission: “50 Protests. 50 Cities. One Movement.” In a display of resistance against the extensive consolidation of power by Donald Trump, the organizers have rallied for nationwide demonstrations under the powerful slogan “No Kings on Presidents’ Day.”
The Growing Climate of Fear Among Federal Employees
In the brisk cold and shining sun, hundreds— possibly thousands— of protesters congregated at noon by the Capitol in Washington. Their frustrations were directed not only at Trump but also at tech mogul Elon Musk. His newly established “Office of Government Efficiency” is reportedly dismantling entire government agencies and laying off thousands of dedicated employees. Trump’s campaign promise to eliminate “rogue bureaucrats” is being executed with relentless precision.
Among the demonstrators is Lisa Smith, who, like many others, has altered her appearance for fear of being recognized as a dissenting voice. “I fear losing my job for opposing this regime,” she states. As a mother and a military intelligence employee, her apprehension is palpable. Yet, she feels compelled to express her dissent, carrying a sign that reads: “Make the American Constitution Great Again,” a nod to Trump’s campaign slogan.
Not wanting to disclose her true identity, Smith has taken to concealing her views even within her workplace. She has removed any items from her office that could be construed as left-leaning, including a rainbow lanyard that once held her ID badge. The current climate, she believes, punishes those who show empathy towards marginalized groups. To safeguard her career, she has even scrubbed her social media profiles of any potentially compromising posts.
Like 2.3 million other federal employees, Smith received a disheartening email in January, offering her a salary continuation until September should she choose to resign. Feeling belittled and insulted by the insinuation that her work is unimportant, she reflects, “I love my job; our mission is dear to me.” Many civil servants could find better-paying jobs in the private sector but choose to stay out of a sense of duty.
While Musk claims to aim for a more efficient bureaucracy, Smith argues that his approach is disorganized and hasty, often leading to negative outcomes. She cites the layoff of 300 employees from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, some of whom were crucial for the construction of U.S. nuclear weapons, highlighting the chaos that ensued when they were later rehired.
As the government continues to lay off many employees still within their probationary periods, Smith warns that this tactic could inflict severe damage on their agencies, especially those staffed largely by young, well-educated professionals eager to serve.
Among the concerned is David Henry, a 21-year-old intern at the State Department who also wishes to remain anonymous. He dreams of a diplomatic career but feels the oppressive “climate of fear” in his agency. Witnessing the government attack those who aim to contribute positively to public service is disheartening for him. Some officials even suspect that Musk’s efficiency office is employing AI to monitor civil servants’ keystrokes, stifling freedom of speech.
Ann Jackson, who has always aspired to work in government, recently lost her job at the Department of Health. She poignantly shares a sign at the protest featuring a picture of her three-month-old baby, stating, “My mother was laid off during parental leave.” She was on the cusp of completing her probationary period and had received excellent performance evaluations throughout her tenure.
Fortunately, Jackson’s husband works outside the government, providing some financial stability for their family. However, the job market is competitive, and she is hesitant to specify which sectors she is pursuing, fearing that others may flood those opportunities. Jackson believes that the recent layoffs will not only impact the local economy but will also erode public trust in government, making it challenging to attract qualified candidates in the future. “It will take a long time before people want to work for the government again,” she concludes, reflecting on the broader implications of her situation and the threats to democracy as a whole.