Probably not fueled but in some agencies most staff is Democrats
> Democrats made up about half of the workforce during the 1997-2019 data period (compared with about 41% of the U.S. population). Meanwhile, registered Republicans dropped from 32% to 26% during the period, with an increase in Independents making up the difference. The most heavily Democratic departments are the EPA, Department of Education, and the State Department, where about 70% of employees are registered to the party, while the most conservative departments are Agriculture and Transportation.
Wasn’t there a study that identified that college educated individuals are more likely to be Democrats? Most US government jobs require a college degree (or higher), so it wouldn’t be surprising to see that population match the findings in the general population?
Additionally, the republican image typically espouses the idea of private industry and private capital more so than the democrats, where public service takes a bigger role. If people already identified with a given ideology, it’s likely that their career choice would reflect that.
Finally, one’s political leanings aren’t being used to determine if they should be hired.
How is being registered with a political party even anywhere in the same ballpark as "ideologically fueled"? And why does that only apply to one political party? Career government employees by definition serve during both Republican and Democratic administrations and at any point the President is going to have a lot of people in the executive branch who voted for the other side. If this partisan mismatch was such a massive problem, we'd have heard about more than a handful of individual cases.
Ideologically, it seems like Republicans or Libertarians oppose the federal government generally. Wouldn't it make sense for there to be less of them wanting to work for the government?
I'd imagine you wouldn't find an abundance of pacifists working in the military either
