Leaders Who Shrug Off Mass Federal Firings Ignore Danger: Werfel

When an airplane hits rough turbulence, most passengers don’t look at the wings or the engine—they look at the flight attendants. If they’re calm, passengers usually stay calm. But if they’re alarmed, then there’s reason for worry.

That quiet signal—the composed or concerned face of someone who knows the system from the inside—matters. And that’s the metaphorical moment our federal government is living in right now.

The functions of the US government are experiencing severe turbulence, with mass layoffs of experienced public servants, dismantled government agencies, abruptly canceled grants and contracts, and unprecedented new policies enacted without input from Congress or the public.

Americans are looking to the people who traditionally offer moral or civic clarity—senior government or elected officials, religious authorities, cultural gatekeepers. Across political lines, it appears, we are seeing two vastly different reactions.

One group of leaders is sitting back, coolly flipping pages in their manuals as if nothing is amiss. The other group is rushing down the aisle to initiate warnings and safety measures. Americans are left confused and divided. Do these unprecedented changes in our national government put us in a state of emergency or not?

I recently served as IRS commissioner under the Biden administration, and during the past few months, I’ve watched from the sidelines as some of the most vital institutions in American life have been dramatically downsized—including the one I once led. The US Supreme Court has signaled there is indeed a legal path for the Trump administration to continue with mass layoffs and agency dismantling.

Therefore, it has become more urgent for leaders in all sectors—civic, religious, private, and especially Congress—to ensure their reactions to the ongoing downsizing are guided by the practical effects that these actions will have on the people they serve.

I’m not saying everyone must oppose these changes. I’m saying that a mere shrug is insufficient for this moment.

This isn’t a partisan point; it’s a civic one. And it’s not a call to return to the status quo. It’s a plea to separate politics and insert substance and practicality when it comes to the nuts and bolts of core government services.

Such services, on one end of the spectrum, can determine whether you will be put on hold for two hours waiting for the IRS to resolve an issue with a lost payment. At the other end of the spectrum, they can determine how long you will wait on government aid from FEMA, when timing may be the difference between life and death for you, your family, or the people in your community.

Let me start with what I know best. The IRS has never been a popular agency—but it is an essential one. The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration confirmed this week that the IRS has lost more than 25,000 employees since Jan. 20 through a mixture of layoffs and encouraged resignations.

A dramatically downsized IRS means a less financially responsible nation, needing to put more essential needs—paving roads, paying troops—on a credit card with a high interest rate rather than paying the bills today.

It also means an IRS that may be too weak to ensure a fair playing field between those who can afford an army of accountants versus those who can’t. And it means more risk of mistakes, slower processing times, and an increasingly difficult time finding the right person or smartphone application to get your issue sorted.

Before congressional leaders and others decide to shrug off these changes because it’s politically easy to take sides against a well-resourced IRS, they should pause to learn and better understand whether such drastic cuts will truly benefit the people they serve—or will it harm them?

The IRS, like many parts of government, needs modernizing. But downsizing alone—and this can be said of the vast majority of the federal government—will rarely be sufficient to serve, protect, and defend hardworking taxpayers effectively.

The famous novel “Atlas Shrugged” portrayed a world where industrial titans walked away from their responsibilities because they believed the system no longer deserved their effort. But what we’re seeing now is a different kind of shrug. Not from builders, but from stewards. Not a retreat from responsibility, but a surrender of vigilance.

When leaders in society shrug while critical government services are diminished or eliminated, when they don’t ask the tough questions to make sure the people in their communities are being well served by these changes, they’re not escaping a broken system—they’re helping to break it.

This country doesn’t need every leader to be a hero. But it does need them to take seriously when citizens look to them for guidance on whether the danger is real or not.

When the difference is between a crash or a safe landing, a shrug won’t cut it.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc., the publisher of Bloomberg Law, Bloomberg Tax, and Bloomberg Government, or its owners.

Author Information

Danny Werfel served as the 50th commissioner of the IRS from March 2023 to January 2025.

Write for Us: Author Guidelines