[Senate Prints 116-50]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


            
116th Congress}                                         { S.PRT.

  2d Session  }        COMMITTEE PRINT   	        { 116-50   

======================================================================

                     DIPLOMACY IN CRISIS: THE TRUMP

                      ADMINISTRATION'S DECIMATION 
                        OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT

                               __________

                        A MINORITY STAFF REPORT

                      PREPARED FOR THE USE OF THE

                     COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     One Hundred Sixteenth Congress

                             SECOND SESSION

                             July 28, 2020

                                     
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


      Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
 

                  Available via the World Wide Web: 
                        http://www.govinfo.gov
                    
                               __________
                               

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
42-925 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2021                     
          
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS        

                JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho, Chairman        
MARCO RUBIO, Florida                 ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
MITT ROMNEY, Utah                    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina       TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio                    TIM KAINE, Virginia
RAND PAUL, Kentucky                  EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
TED CRUZ, Texas                      CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia
                  Christopher M. Socha, Staff Director        
               Jessica Lewis, Democratic Staff Director        
                    John Dutton, Chief Clerk        



                              (ii)        

                           
                          C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Letter of Transmittal............................................     v

Executive Summary................................................     1



Prologue--Diplomacy 101: Why the State Department Matters........     5



Chapter 1--Vacant Posts and Frequent Turnover: An America Less 
  Present and Less Effective.....................................    11



Chapter 2--The Trump Administration's Record on Diplomatic 
  Nominees: Repeated Vetting Failures, Poor Judgement............    21



Chapter 3--A Culture of Fear and Mistrust: Attacks on Career 
  Employees......................................................    29



Chapter 4--A Crisis of Morale....................................    39



Chapter 5--Conclusion and Recommendations: The Challenges Ahead..    49



                                 (iii)

 
                         Letter of Transmittal

                              ----------                              

                              United States Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                     Washington, DC, July 28, 2020.




    Dear Colleagues:  The State Department is at a crossroads. 
Through neglect and corrosive leadership, President Trump and 
his Administration have decimated our most effective tool for 
advancing American interests. Senior-level vacancies, repeated 
nominee vetting failures, and attacks on career public servants 
have had a destructive effect on our nation's premier foreign 
policy agency.
    Given the importance of these issues to our national 
security and foreign policy, I directed members of my Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee staff, including Megan Bartley, 
Terrell Henry, Nina Russell, and Jasmine Wyatt, to examine the 
effect of the Trump administration's actions on the Department. 
They, along with other members of my staff, and fellows and 
interns, conducted a thorough review of how the Trump 
administration has devalued diplomacy and undermined public 
servants.
    This report finds that, despite commitments by two 
Secretaries of State to fill key positions, throughout the 
Trump administration, the Department has suffered an 
unacceptably high number of vacancies and acting officials. At 
the same time, political appointees forced out or sidelined 
many of the Department's talented and experienced career 
personnel, resulting in a stunning loss of expertise. These 
vacancies and staff losses directly contributed to a lack of 
U.S. leadership on the global stage and consequently harmed 
U.S. national security interests.
    Unqualified and unfit nominees to senior positions further 
exacerbated the effect of those vacancies and led to 
disappointing failures of leadership, including the 
mistreatment of and attacks on career employees, which have 
been met with little or no accountability from Secretary 
Pompeo. As a result, employees reported precipitous drops in 
morale, low confidence in senior leadership, and a weakened 
ability to do their jobs effectively and without fear of 
partisan retribution. Furthermore, the Administration's anemic 
response to a national movement against racial injustice and 
racism furthered cemented already low morale.




                                  (v)

    If we are to compete in the world and advance U.S. 
interests, there is significant work ahead to rebuild our 
diplomatic corps, restore accountability, and reassert our 
values. It is my sincere hope that the findings and 
recommendations in this report will help shape a bipartisan 
effort in Congress to restore the State Department's vital role 
in advancing American interests throughout the world.
    Sincerely,


                                           Robert Menendez,
                                                    Ranking Member.

                           Executive Summary

                              ----------                              

    Every day, at home and abroad, the people who make up the 
Department of State help keep Americans safe from conflict, 
secure from terrorism, advance America's economic interests, 
embody our best values, and represent us to the world. The 
Department's public servants are dedicated to serving the 
nation, regardless of party, president, or politics--and they 
do so with little fanfare, out of public view, and often at 
great sacrifice.
    Yet, under President Trump, the Department of State and its 
dedicated career public servants have found themselves under 
attack. Non-partisan public servants have been smeared as the 
``Deep State,'' accused of trying to undermine the President, 
and labeled ``radical unelected bureaucrats.''\1\ Over the last 
three and a half years, the Department has been plagued by a 
hiring freeze, a bungled ``reform'' effort, proposals to slash 
its funding by one-third, and persistent vacancies, all of 
which have hampered its effectiveness.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Rebecca Ingber, ``Bureaucratic Resistance and the Deep State 
Myth,'' Just Security, Oct. 18, 2019; Tom Shoop, ``Trump, the GOP and 
the `Swamp:' A Dangerous New Low in Bureaucrat Bashing,'' Government 
Executive, Feb. 11, 2020.
    \2\ Robbie Gramer, ``State Department Vacancies Increase Embassy 
Security Risks, Report Warns,'' Foreign Policy, Mar. 7, 2019; U.S. 
Government Accountability Office, Department of State: Integrated 
Action Plan Could Enhance Efforts to Reduce Persistent Overseas Foreign 
Service Vacancies, GAO-19-220, at 17-20 (Mar. 2019); Felicia Schwartz, 
``Trump Administration Proposes 32% Cut to State Department Budget,'' 
The Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2017; Conor Finnegan, ``Trump Proposes 
Deep Cuts in State Department Budget,'' ABC News, Feb. 12, 2018; Nahal 
Toosi, ``Tillerson scales back State Department restructuring plan,'' 
Politico, Feb. 7, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While Secretary Pompeo came into office stating his 
intentions to reverse some of the Administration's more 
damaging personnel policies, under his tenure, critical senior 
positions remain vacant, making it more difficult for the 
Department to do America's work on the global stage.\3\ 
Assistant Secretaries, key ambassadorships, and other senior 
positions have sat empty for months--in some cases, years --
without nominees for Senate confirmation.\4\ A number of 
vacancies exist because many of the President's nominees for 
national security posts lack the character and fitness expected 
of U.S. diplomats.\5\ The White House has repeatedly ignored 
basic due diligence and vetting, struggling or unable to find 
individuals willing to serve in this Administration and of 
suitable fitness to represent the United States.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Three and a half years into the administration, 11 Assistant 
Secretary or Under Secretary posts are vacant or filled by acting 
officials. See Chapter 2; Tracy Wilkinson, ``In His First Year, Pompeo 
Brought `Swagger' But Made Little Progress on Foreign Policy 
Priorities,'' LA Times, Apr. 26, 2019.
    \4\ For example, there was no Assistant Secretary nominee for South 
Asian Affairs until January 2019. That nominee was later withdrawn, and 
no replacement has been named. See Robert Williams, nominee to be 
Assistant Secretary for South Asian Affairs, PN6, (116th Congress) 
(nominated, Jan. 3, 2019; withdrawn, Apr. 11, 2019); Chapter 1.
    \5\ See, e.g., Justin Rohrlich, ``Trump has appointed the highest 
percentage of inexperienced ambassadors since FDR,'' Quartz, Feb. 21, 
2019; Dan De Luce et al., ``Senior Trump official embellished resume, 
had face on fake Time cover,'' NBC News, Nov. 12, 2019; see also 
Chapter 2.
    \6\ See Chapter 2; Patrick Finley, ``Tucson doctor gets restraining 
order against Olson's ex-wife,'' Arizona Daily Star, Nov. 6, 2008; 
Doyle McManus, ``Almost Half the Top Jobs in Trump's State Department 
Are Still Empty,'' The Atlantic, Nov. 4, 2018,; Lisa Rein & Abby 
Phillip, ``Help Wanted: Why Republicans Won't Work for the Trump 
Administration,'' The Washington Post, June 17, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Allegations of retaliation and reprisal persist, and 
Secretary Pompeo has been missing in action when it comes to 
defending his own staff and organization.\7\ Examples abound of 
how the Department's senior officials act in contravention of 
the professional ``ethos'' heralded by Secretary Pompeo.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See Chapter 3.
    \8\ See U.S. Department of State, ``Professional Ethos,'' https://
www.state.gov/about/professional-ethos (last visited July 15, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The result is a State Department left feeling ``besieged,'' 
``demoralized,'' ``battered,'' ``beaten,'' ``mistreated,'' 
``paralyzed,'' and ``at a new low.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Ted Osius, ``Respect, Trust and Partnership: Keeping Diplomacy 
on Course in Troubling Times,'' The Foreign Service Journal, Apr. 2018; 
Reid Wilson, ``Diplomats describe all-time low in morale at State under 
Trump,'' The Hill, Oct. 21, 2019; Abigail Tracy, `` `Be Careful What 
You Wish For': How Mike Pompeo Trumpified the State Department,'' 
Vanity Fair, June 25, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Recent months have only compounded this reality. Late on a 
Friday night in May 2020, the President, at Secretary Pompeo's 
urging, ousted the State Department Inspector General charged 
with conducting independent oversight, whose work has revealed 
significant challenges and defects the Department and its 
leadership faces--and who was investigating the Secretary's own 
conduct at the time of his firing.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ Edward Wong, ``Inspector General's Firing Puts Pompeo's Use of 
Taxpayer Funds Under Scrutiny,'' The New York Times, May 17, 2020. The 
Inspector General has conducted in-depth investigations into political 
retaliation, see Chapter 3, and was in the midst of investigations into 
the Secretary when he was fired. Robbie Gramer, ``Fired State Watchdog 
Confirms Ongoing Investigation Into Pompeo and His Wife, Foreign 
Policy, June 10, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Meanwhile, as the nation struggles to confront and address 
persistent racial inequality and injustice, diplomats abroad 
face significant challenges in representing the United States 
and the ideals our nation embodies to the rest of the world. 
And non-white Foreign Service Officers and Department 
employees, especially Hispanic and African American employees, 
continue to struggle to advance and reach the upper echelons of 
leadership in the State Department.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ See, e.g., Robbie Gramer, ``Fighting for U.S. Values Abroad, 
Black Diplomats Struggle With Challenges at Home,'' Foreign Policy, 
June 11, 2010; Lara Jakes, ``A Reckoning With Race to Ensure Diversity 
for America's Face Abroad,'' The New York Times, June 27, 2020; U.S. 
Government Accountability Office, State Department: Additional Steps 
Are Needed to Identify Potential Barriers to Diversity (Jan. 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democratic Staff 
report catalogues some of these significant challenges. 
Employees report that their morale, and their confidence in 
their senior leaders, have dropped precipitously. Many are far 
more fearful today than they were three years ago to report a 
violation of law, and are equally afraid they will be subjected 
to reprisal.
    Political appointees harboring suspicion about career 
public servants' perceived political affiliations have engaged 
in demoralizing and unjustified actions that have endangered 
the livelihoods of dedicated public servants.\12\ At the same 
time, the Department's turmoil has brought to light 
institutional deficiencies that can be addressed, and 
protections for employees that should be strengthened. This 
report calls for a strong response to the chaos and 
mismanagement of the Department by the Trump administration. 
Congress must take action to leave the Department's dedicated 
employees better protected and more effective--and, in so 
doing, further safeguard America's national security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ See, e.g., U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector 
General, Review of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper 
Personnel Practices in the Bureau of International Organization 
Affairs, at 1 (Aug. 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These years of intentional and collateral damage to the 
diplomatic workforce could not have come at a worse time. Our 
diplomats help mitigate the impact of international crises on 
American citizens. Even under the best of circumstances, 
addressing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic would have been 
difficult and unprecedented. The systemic challenges of senior-
level vacancies, understaffing, and unqualified nominees, 
compounded with U.S. pandemic under-preparedness, have left 
U.S. diplomats feeling directionless and that they are fending 
for themselves.\13\ The Trump administration's negligence and 
its attacks on our diplomatic corps, who serve on the 
frontlines of our global pandemic response, have left diplomats 
devoid of leadership and cost the United States valuable time 
in preparedness and response efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ See John Hudson, ``Coronavirus case in State Department-
provided housing alarms diplomats,'' The Washington Post, Apr. 10, 
2020; Nicole Gaouette & Kylie Atwood, ``Lacking Clear State Department 
coronavirus guidance, embassies are `just making it up as we go along,' 
'' CNN, Mar. 20, 2020; Nahal Toosi, ``Pompeo Faces Internal Questions 
About His Handling of the Coronavirus,'' Politico, Mar. 17, 2020; 
Robbie Gramer, ``Pompeo Criticized for Failure to Communicate on 
Coronavirus,'' Foreign Policy, Mar. 17, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The President is undermining the United States from its 
role as a global leader, withdrawing from multilateral 
commitments, seeking to walk back our responsibilities to 
allies and partners, and retreating from leading the response 
to global crises. The State Department stands as our first line 
of defense on all these fronts to ensure that America does not 
become less secure. To keep America at the forefront, and to 
keep Americans safe and prosperous, we must build, retain, and 
stand up for a diplomatic corps that embodies the best of our 
nation.
    This report is based on an extensive Democratic staff 
analysis of the administration's nominees, Department 
vacancies, State Department Office of the Inspector General 
reports and findings, and Employee Viewpoint Survey data from 
2016 to 2019. It also draws from public reports and statements 
by former officials documenting a decline in morale and an 
increased fear of retaliation, and the effect those had on the 
departures of several public servants from the Department.
    Chapter 1 examines the pattern of vacancies and acting 
officials that has characterized the Trump administration's 
State Department, and the impact on U.S. foreign policy. 
Chapter 2 highlights examples of the Administration's failure 
to adequately vet nominees and its practice of nominating 
candidates who lack the fitness to serve as U.S. diplomats. 
Chapter 3 describes incidents of retaliation and attacks 
against diplomats and career public servants that have had a 
corrosive effect on morale. Chapter 4 presents employee survey 
results from selected bureaus demonstrating that a crisis in 
morale and lack of faith in leadership at the Department has 
increased to staggering levels. It also shows how the 
Administration's response to ongoing racial injustice affects 
the ability of U.S. diplomats to fulfill their mission. Chapter 
5 sets out a series of recommendations and guiding principles 
to start the rebuilding that must take place over the coming 
years.

Key Findings:
   Vacancies and acting officials at the Department have 
        persisted through two Secretaries of State, despite 
        numerous commitments to fill key positions.

   Three and a half years into the Administration, 11 
        Assistant Secretary or Under Secretary posts--more than 
        one-third--are vacant or filled by acting officials.

   As of July 2020, more than half of Senate-confirmed 
        Department positions have been filled at least once by 
        someone who had not been confirmed.

   Career public servants report that senior leadership 
        exhibits a sense of disrespect and disdain for their 
        work, prompting many to leave and contributing to a 
        loss of expertise at the Department.

   Senior leadership's lack of accountability and refusal to 
        defend career employees against attacks has contributed 
        to declining morale and a drop in confidence in 
        leadership.

   From 2016 to 2019, employees in key bureaus reported steep 
        increases in fear of reprisal for reporting suspected 
        violations of law and declining confidence in senior 
        Department leadership.

Key Recommendations:
    This report makes 10 recommendations aimed at reversing the 
downward trends in morale, strengthening protections for 
employees, and ensuring that the individuals leading our 
foreign policy are of the caliber that the American people 
deserve in their diplomats.


 1. Rebuild and retain expertise in the State Department's 
        ranks.

 2. Reduce barriers to restoring lost expertise and for former 
        diplomats and civil servants to return to the 
        Department.

 3. Promote more career employees to senior positions.

 4. Increase diversity at senior ranks and throughout the 
        Department.

 5. Formalize the State Department exit survey process.

 6. Initiate a review of how the ``corridor reputation'' system 
        at the Department enables or exacerbates the report's 
        challenges outlined in the report.

 7. Restore and commit to minimum vetting standards for 
        nominees.

 8. Prioritize and fill senior leadership slots.

 9. Maintain an independent Inspector General.
10. Enforce accountability for improper personnel practices and 
        management.


                                Prologue


                      Diplomacy 101: Why the State
                           Department Matters

                              ----------                              

        We have got to understand that what we do in the world 
        is not only good for the world; it's good for us. It's 
        not a form of philanthropy; it's a form of national 
        security.

                                                    Richard Haass, 
                  President of the Council on Foreign Relations\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Richard Haass, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, 
Interview with Margaret Warner, PBS NewsHour, Apr. 17, 2017.


    In the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak, in a heroic effort, 
from late January 2020 to June 2020, the State Department 
repatriated more than 100,000 Americans from 136 countries to 
the United States after many nations suspended international 
flights and closed their borders to slow the spread of the 
virus.\15\ A few years earlier, employees from the State 
Department's San Juan and Dallas Passport Agencies helped 
evacuate more than 1,200 Americans and their families from St. 
Maarten after Hurricanes Irma and Jose ravaged the island, 
ensuring that they were quickly and safely returned home.\16\ 
Under both the Obama and Trump administrations, diplomats have 
negotiated for years to successfully obtain the release of 
several U.S. citizen detainees from Iranian prisons.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ U.S. Department of State, ``Department of State Coronavirus 
Repatriation Statistics,'' https://www.state.gov/coronavirus/
repatriation/ (last visited July 10, 2020).
    \16\ Luis Martinez, ``Americans on St. Maarten tell of Irma's 
devastation, lawlessness; 1,200 evacuated,'' ABC News, Sept. 10, 2017; 
Alastair Jamieson & Daniella Silva, ``Over 1,200 Americans Evacuated 
From St. Maarten Amid Reports of Violence,'' NBC News, Sept. 10, 2017; 
DipNote, ``Evacuating U.S. Citizens from St. Maarten,'' Sept. 10, 2017, 
https://www.state.gov/evacuating-u-s-citizens-from-st-maarten/.
    \17\ Yeganeh Torbati & Joel Schectman, ``Special Report: America's 
unending hostage crisis with Iran,'' Reuters, Aug. 1, 2018; Nicole 
Gaouette et al., ``Trump announces American has been released from 
Lebanese prison,'' CNN, Mar. 19, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This is just some of the work diplomatic professionals 
carry out every day--often behind the scenes, with the public 
unaware of the effort and sacrifice that helps keep Americans 
safe. Today, diplomatic professionals at home, and through more 
than 270 embassies, consulates, and missions abroad, help 
America fight terrorism, stop the proliferation of nuclear 
weapons, end the modern slave trade, reduce global poverty, 
mitigate climate change, end hunger and malnutrition, and stop 
the trafficking of drugs.\18\ Our diplomats help Americans 
adopt children from foreign countries, provide life-saving 
humanitarian aid to people fleeing conflict and persecution, 
support Americans caught in disasters abroad, bolster American 
cybersecurity, and expand American businesses.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ U.S. Department of State, ``HR Fact Sheet,'' Jan. 2020, 
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/HR--Factsheet1219.pdf; 
National Museum of American Diplomacy, ``Who is a diplomat?,'' https://
diplomacy.state.gov/diplomacy/who-is-a-diplomat/ (last visited July 9, 
2020); National Museum of American Diplomacy, ``How does the U.S. 
Department of State engage with other countries?,'' https://
diplomacy.state.gov/diplomacy/how-does-the-u-s-department-of-state-
engage-with-other-countries/ (last visited July 9, 2020); U.S. 
Department of State, ``Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in 
Persons,'' https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-
civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights/office-to-monitor-and-
combat-trafficking-in-persons/ (last visited July 9, 2020); National 
Museum of American Diplomacy, ``What are the key policies of the U.S. 
Department of State?,'' https://diplomacy.state.gov/diplomacy/what-are-
the-key-policies-of-the-u-s-department-of-state/ (last visited July 9, 
2020).
    \19\ The National Museum of American Diplomacy, ``Who is a 
diplomat?,'' https://diplomacy.state.gov/diplomacy/who-is-a-diplomat/ 
(last visited July 6, 2020); DipNote, ``#State4States: A Year-Long Look 
at How @StateDept Works for the American People,'' Nov. 6, 2019, 
https://www.state.gov/state4states-a-year-long-look-at-how-statedept-
works-for-the-american-people/ (last visited Mar. 4, 2020); U.S. 
Department of State, ``Cybercrime and Intellectual Property Crime,'' 
https://www.state.gov/cybercrime-and-intellectual-property-crime/ (last 
visited July 9, 2020); U.S. Department of State, ``Bureau of 
Population, Refugees, and Migration,'' https://www.state.gov/bureaus-
offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-
rights/bureau-of-population-refugees-and-migration/ (last visited July 
14, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Department personnel also help ensure the United States is 
a good steward of American taxpayer dollars by monitoring and 
evaluating the performance of foreign assistance programs.\20\ 
Diplomats help keep U.S. political leaders informed of critical 
developments around the world, how foreign governments are 
responding to U.S. policy, and the state of relations between 
our allies and our adversaries.\21\ Department personnel engage 
in critical information gathering and analysis, which informs 
and influences our national security decisions.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ U.S. Department of State, ``Office of Foreign Assistance, 
Resources and Reports,'' https://www.state.gov/resources-and-reports-
office-of-foreign-assistance/ (last visited June 24, 2020).
    \21\ Andrew Glass, ``Newspapers publish leaked diplomatic cables, 
Nov. 28, 2010,'' Politico, Nov. 28, 2017.
    \22\ U.S. Department of State, ``About Us--Bureau of Intelligence 
and Research,'' https://www.state.gov/about-us-bureau-of-intelligence-
and-research/ (last visited July 6, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The State Department also promotes American democratic 
values, such as free and fair elections, transparency in 
government, protection of basic human rights and freedoms, and 
equality amongst all peoples.\23\ Historically, the Department 
has carried out these many varied roles on a budget 19 times 
smaller than the U.S. defense budget, and, while the gap 
between the defense and international affairs budgets has 
decreased in recent years, the Department still operates on a 
budget 12 times smaller than the defense budget.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ U.S. Department of State, 2017-2018 Advancing Freedom and 
Democracy Report, Sept. 6, 2018.
    \24\ Bill Burns, President of the Carnegie Endowment for 
International Peace, Interview with Mary Louise Kelly, All Things 
Considered, NPR, Oct. 15, 2019; Historical Tables, Budget of the United 
States Government, Fiscal Year 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In carrying out these duties, Department employees face a 
range of threats, including political violence, crime, 
terrorism, natural disasters, exposure to health hazards, and 
more.\25\ Some make the ultimate sacrifice for their country: 
as of May 2019, 250 diplomats had lost their lives while 
serving abroad, including eight U.S. ambassadors who have died 
in the line of duty.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General, Review 
of the Effects of the Department of State Hiring Freeze, at 9 (Aug. 
2019).
    \26\ Six ambassadors have been killed by militants, and two died in 
plane crashes. American Foreign Service Association, ``AFSA Memorial 
Plaque List,'' https://www.afsa.org/afsa-memorial-plaque-list (last 
visited July 6, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The State Department's diplomatic corps, comprised of a 
Foreign and Civil service, represents highly talented and 
specialized individuals.\27\ More than 60 percent of Foreign 
Service Officers have advanced degrees.\28\ U.S. diplomats are 
trained to communicate in over 70 foreign languages.\29\ 
Characterized by ``excellence and professionalism,'' U.S. 
diplomats are recognized by Congress as ``essential in the 
national interest to assist the President and the Secretary of 
State in conducting the foreign affairs of the United 
States.''\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ The Department is mainly divided into Foreign Service and 
Civil Service, all of whom undergo rigorous and ongoing training when 
they start and as they progress through their careers. Foreign Service 
members, including many Ambassadors, largely represent the U.S. abroad 
and rotate through a series of foreign and domestic postings. Civil 
Service employees, which also include some Ambassadors, are generally 
based in Washington D.C., where they serve as the domestic counterparts 
to their Foreign Service colleagues and offer specialized subject-
matter and institutional expertise in key areas of foreign policy. U.S. 
Department of State, ``Who We Are,'' https://careers.state.gov/learn/
who-we-are/ (last visited July 9, 2020); U.S. Department of State, 
Agency Financial Report: Fiscal Year 2019, at 8 (Jan. 17, 2020). The 
Department also depends heavily on foreign national employees who 
support U.S. embassies and consulates abroad. These locally-employed 
staff provide local expertise, language skills, and institutional 
knowledge and continuity for overseas posts as American employees 
rotate in and out.
    \28\ Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening the Department of State, 
at 44 (May 2019).
    \29\ U.S. Department of State, Five-Year Workforce Plan: Fiscal 
Years 2019-2023, at 44 (Feb. 2020).
    \30\ Foreign Service Act of 1980, P.L. 96-465, Sec. 101, 22 U.S.C. 
Sec. 3901(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Abroad, Foreign Service Officers serve in hardship posts 
without their families, or bring family members along in non-
hardship posts, moving every two to three years. Spouses give 
up careers or studies, and children lose friends and are forced 
to navigate the disorienting experience of frequent moves. 
These combined sacrifices are a testament to the dedication of 
public servants who serve our nation and dedicate their lives 
to promoting American democratic values.
Preventing Conflict
    From its inception in 1789 as America's first federal 
agency, the State Department has been responsible for 
navigating relationships between the U.S. and foreign nations, 
negotiating the end to foreign conflicts, and establishing the 
foundation for international peace and cooperation through 
alliances.\31\ Its diplomats and other professionals play, in 
the words of former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, 
``indispensable roles in maintaining security and peace at home 
and around the world.''\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ The State Department was originally founded as the Department 
of Foreign Affairs in 1789; U.S. Department of State, ``A History of 
the United States Department of State,'' July 1996, https://1997-
2001.state.gov/about--state/history/dephis.html (last visited June 24, 
2020); Letter from James A. Baker III, Secretary of State, on the 
opening of the U.S. Diplomacy Center Pavilion, Jan. 10, 2017 (as read 
by Secretary of State John Kerry).
    \32\ Letter from James A. Baker III, Secretary of State, on the 
opening of the U.S. Diplomacy Center Pavilion, Jan. 10, 2017 (as read 
by Secretary of State John Kerry).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Diplomatic professionals remain our first line of defense 
against war because they can stop conflicts before they start. 
U.S. diplomats preempt war declarations with peaceful 
resolutions, and have convinced countries to abandon weapons of 
mass destruction.\33\ Then-Commander of U.S. Central Command 
General James Mattis recognized the important role that 
diplomacy plays in avoiding conflicts when he told Congress, 
``if you don't fund the State Department fully then I need to 
buy more ammunition.''\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ William Burns, The Back Channel, Random House, at 190-192 
(2019); Patrick E. Tyler & James Risen, ``Secret Diplomacy Won Libyan 
Pledge on Arms,'' The New York Times, Dec. 21, 2003.
    \34\ Testimony of General James Mattis, Commander of U.S. Central 
Command, U.S. Central Command and U.S. Special Operations Command, 
Hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mar. 5, 2013, at 
16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Promoting U.S. Business
    One of the highest, but lesser known, priorities of our 
embassies abroad is to promote U.S. business interests.\35\ 
Ninety-six percent of global consumers live outside of the 
United States, and diplomacy is essential in promoting U.S. 
exports and creating a level playing field for American 
businesses abroad.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ See, e.g., U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) 
and U.S. Department of State, USAID and Department of State Strategic 
Plan FY 2014-2017, at 8 (Apr. 2014); Marie ``Masha'' Yovanovitch, 
Deposition before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, 
House Committee on Oversight and Reform, and the House Committee on 
Foreign Affairs, Oct. 11, 2019, at 41-42; Testimony of Marie ``Masha'' 
Yovanovitch, Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Impeachment Inquiry: 
Ambassador Marie Masha Yovanovitch, Hearing before the House Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence, Nov. 15, 2019.
    \36\ U.S. Department of State, ``Direct Line for American 
Business,'' https://www.state.gov/direct-line-for-american-business/ 
(last visited July 6, 2020); William Burns, The Back Channel, Random 
House, at 11 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These efforts create real benefits for American 
communities. For example, in 2019, Texas exported $330.5 
billion worth of goods, which supported more than 910,000 jobs 
in the state; foreign direct investment into Texas supported an 
additional 622,700 jobs in 2017.\37\ In 2019, California 
exported $174 billion worth of goods, which supported more than 
683,000 jobs; foreign direct investment supported an additional 
802,800 jobs.\38\ The Department also provides visas for more 
than a million foreign students and tourists in the United 
States, who generate about $240 billion every year for the U.S. 
economy.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\ U.S. Department of State, ``U.S. Department of State in 
Texas,'' https://www.state.gov/states/texas/ (last visited July 6, 
2020); International Trade Administration & U.S. Department of 
Commerce, ``Texas Exports, Jobs, & Foreign Investment,'' https://
legacy.trade.gov/mas/ian/statereports/states/tx.pdf (last visited July 
6, 2020).
    \38\ U.S. Department of State, ``U.S. Department of State in 
California,'' https://www.state.gov/states/california/ (last visited 
July 6, 2020); International Trade Administration & U.S. Department of 
Commerce, ``California Exports, Jobs, & Foreign Investment,'' https://
legacy.trade.gov/mas/ian/statereports/states/ca.pdf (last visited July 
6, 2020).
    \39\ William Burns, The Back Channel, Random House, at 11 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Securing Alliances and Countering Terrorism
    America is stronger when we have allies to help us pursue 
our interests. Our diplomats build, strengthen, and maintain 
the alliances and partnerships that make America safer and more 
prosperous.\40\ Through these treaties, partnerships, and 
security agreements, our diplomatic professionals help our 
country adapt and thrive in an increasingly complex world with 
global challenges such as climate change, cyberattacks, and 
transnational crime.\41\ As one diplomat put it, ``Diplomacy is 
the art of turning contacts into friends, and friends into 
partners as we work together to solve common challenges, 
contribute to global development, and work towards achieving 
shared goals.''\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \40\ See National Museum of American Diplomacy, ``Diplomacy is our 
Mission,'' https://diplomacy.state.gov/diplomacyisourmission/ (last 
visited July 9, 2020).
    \41\ See, e.g., National Museum of American Diplomacy, ``Diplomacy 
is our Mission,'' https://diplomacy.state.gov/diplomacyisourmission/ 
(last visited July 9, 2020); U.S. Embassy in Turkey, ``10 Things You 
Need to Know about NATO,'' Apr. 4, 2019.
    \42\ Julie Eadeh, Political Counselor at the U.S. Consulate General 
in Hong Kong, ``Serving Citizens Abroad in Times of War,'' Georgetown 
University Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, May 14, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One area the diplomatic workforce leverages our alliances 
in is counterterrorism. Through partnerships such as the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the 79-member Global 
Coalition to Defeat ISIS, which is the largest international 
coalition in history, the State Department works to detect, 
degrade, and dismantle terrorist networks.\43\ Diplomats and 
civil servants also work to address the root causes of 
extremism and counter violent extremist narratives.\44\ 
Alongside its international partners, the Department works with 
nearly a dozen American cities and more than 100 cities 
globally to counter violent extremism and terrorism.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\ U.S. Embassy in Turkey, ``10 Things You Need to Know about 
NATO,'' Apr. 4, 2019; U.S. Department of State, Fact Sheet: The Global 
Coalition--Working To Defeat ISIS, Feb. 6, 2019; U.S. Department of 
State, ``Countering Terrorism,'' https://www.state.gov/policy-issues/
countering-terrorism/ (last visited July 16, 2020).
    \44\ U.S. State Department Office of the Inspector General, Audit 
of the Department of State Implementation of Policies Intended to 
Counter Violent Extremism, at 1, June 2019.
    \45\ Dipnote, ``Countering Racially or Ethnically Motivated 
Terrorism,'' Sept. 30, 2019; Institute for Strategic Dialogue, Strong 
Cities Network Programme Summary (2019), at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
    The nation's diplomatic personnel are, in the State 
Department's words, the Department's ``greatest asset.''\46\ 
U.S. diplomats carry out the foreign policy of the United 
States on behalf of all Americans. Retired Ambassador Mari 
Carmen Aponte captured well the nature of their commitment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\ U.S. Department of State, Agency Financial Report: Fiscal Year 
2019, at 122, Jan. 17, 2020


        [E]very single day that I was at the embassy I saw what 
        the diplomats do for the bottom line of the United 
        States. They help Americans in trouble overseas, they 
        advocate for American businesses, and create American 
        jobs via trade agreements. They make the world safer by 
        negotiating nuclear and non-proliferation accords. They 
        facilitate American travel abroad by issuing passports. 
        They promote the rule of law and use aid to help 
        countries to develop so that their people don't feel 
        that they have to immigrate. They help mitigate and 
        resolve conflicts. They promote legitimate travel and 
        promote study in the U.S. which helps our economy and 
        our universities. They help in times of natural 
        disasters and they are front and center during 
        outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\ Remarks of Ambassador Mari Carmen Aponte, ``Addressing 
Diversity at the State Department,'' Congressional Briefing hosted by 
Senators Bob Menendez and Ben Cardin, Feb. 25, 2020.


    Nowhere have the heroic efforts and sacrifice of our 
diplomats been on fuller display than during the unprecedented 
COVID-19 pandemic. Department employees worked tirelessly, 
managing crucial information-sharing with their domestic 
counterparts, foreign governments, and Americans, and working 
to mitigate the impacts of the crisis as it unfolded in real-
time.
    They also did so with little guidance from senior 
leadership early on in the pandemic.\48\ In March 2020, the 
President abruptly announced travel restrictions on European 
countries, and diplomats fielded calls from blindsided 
international counterparts and panicked Americans trying to get 
home.\49\ As the virus began to spread more rapidly, diplomats 
did not know how to handle visa requests or how the Department 
planned to prevent spread at overseas posts, and they were 
troubled by the lack of transparency around the number of 
internal COVID-19 cases at the Department.\50\ One diplomat 
concluded, ``every embassy is just making it up as we go along 
. . . there's no uniformity.''\51\ As the virus added to the 
workload for diplomats, many were left frustrated by the lack 
of leadership and the patchwork of uneven guidance that 
complicated their ability to fulfill their duties.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\ See Nicole Gaouette & Kylie Atwood, ``Lacking Clear State 
Department coronavirus guidance, embassies are `just making it up as we 
go along,''' CNN, Mar. 20, 2020; Erin Banco, ``Pompeo's Virus Response 
Blasted by State Dept Officials,'' The Daily Beast, Mar. 17, 2020.
    \49\ See Norimitsu Onishi, ``Chaos in Europe, and Anger, Over U.S. 
Travel Ban to Curb Coronavirus,'' The New York Times, Mar. 12, 2020; 
Heather Murphy, ``Trump's Travel Ban Leaves Americans in Europe 
Scrambling to Get Home,'' The New York Times, Mar. 12, 2020; Nicole 
Gaouette et al., ``European Union Leaders Denounce Trump's Coronavirus 
Travel Restrictions,'' CNN, Mar. 12, 2020.
    \50\ Erin Banco, ``Pompeo's Virus Response Blasted by State Dept 
Officials,'' The Daily Beast, Mar. 17, 2020.
    \51\ Nicole Gaouette & Kylie Atwood, ``Lacking Clear State 
Department coronavirus guidance, embassies are `just making it up as we 
go along,''' CNN, Mar. 20, 2020.
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further compounding these challenges was President Trump's 
disdainful statements about diplomats in the midst of the 
pandemic. During a COVID-19 White House task force press 
briefing, President Trump referred to the diplomats working 
hard on behalf of Americans as the ``Deep State Department,'' 
without any pushback from the Secretary Pompeo, who was 
standing next to the President.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\ Press Briefing, President Trump, Vice President Pence, and 
Members of the Coronavirus Task Force, Mar. 20, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The mistreatment of our nation's diplomats, who have risked 
their lives on the frontlines to keep Americans safe during the 
COVID-19 pandemic, is just the latest example of the 
mismanagement by the Trump administration and its chaotic side 
effects. As this report describes, despite the many benefits 
these diplomatic professionals provide to the United States, 
the Trump administration has left the State Department reeling 
from an unprecedented lack of leadership, and demoralized from 
intentional attacks on its professional integrity.


                               Chapter 1

 Vacant Posts and Frequent Turnover: An America Less Present and Less 
                               Effective

                              ----------                              

        You know how we don't win wars without soldiers . . . . 
        We don't win foreign policy and we don't maintain 
        America's global leadership without diplomats.

                                  --Ambassador Barbara Stephenson, 
                President, American Foreign Service Association\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \54\ Carol Morello, ``How a retiring American diplomat helped 
navigate a `perilous minefield,' '' The Washington Post, July 26, 2019.


    The State Department's work is critical to ensuring 
American safety and prosperity. Vacancies in senior leadership 
posts hamper the Department's ability to carry out its mission 
and engage in effective diplomacy. Yet, under this 
Administration, the President has been slow or failed 
altogether to nominate individuals for dozens of senior posts. 
Through two Secretaries of State, and despite numerous 
commitments to fill key positions, vacancies and acting 
officials at the Department have persisted.
    Three and a half years into the Administration, 11 
Assistant Secretary or Under Secretary posts--more than one-
third--are vacant or filled by acting officials.\55\ Of those 
positions, all but three had no named nominees by the 
Administration at the time of publication.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \55\ This does not include the announced resignation of Michael 
Evanoff, Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, who announced on 
July 14, 2020 that he was leaving the Department effective July 24, 
2020. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Staff Analysis, as of July 15, 
2020.
    \56\ As of July 15, 2020, the following nominees were pending for 
Assistant Secretary or Under Secretary positions: Ronald Mortenson 
(nominated May 24, 2018), Carlos Trujillo, Assistant Secretary for 
Western Hemisphere Affairs (nominated Mar. 18, 2020), and Marshall 
Billingslea, nominee for Under Secretary of Arms Control (nominated May 
4, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The basic responsibility of filling key posts has been 
plagued by a combination of a White House that is slow to 
nominate, frequent turnover, and, often, poor vetting of 
candidates.\57\ As an illustrative example, it took the 
Administration 11 months to submit the first nomination for 
Under Secretary for Arms Control.\58\ Then, following a 
controversy over that confirmed official's failure to disclose 
key information, she departed in late 2019, and it took another 
six months for the White House to propose a replacement--a 
nominee who had languished in the Senate for a different Under 
Secretary position, due to his role in controversial 
policies.\59\ As a result, the bureau that negotiates with 
Russia and other nuclear powers on arms control and leads U.S. 
policy on non-proliferation has been vacant or led by an acting 
official for two out of the three and a half years of this 
Administration.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\ See Chapter 2.
    \58\ Andrea Thompson, nominee for Under Secretary of Arms Control, 
was submitted on December 19, 2017. See PN1326, 115th Congress.
    \59\ Josh Rogin, ``State Department official didn't disclose ties 
to the boyfriend of Russian agent Maria Butina,'' The Washington Post, 
June 19, 2019; Kylie Atwood & Jennifer Hansler, ``Top State Department 
official with ties to Russian agent Butina's boyfriend will depart 
post,'' CNN, Sept. 20, 2019. Marshall Billingslea, nominee for Under 
Secretary of Arms Control, was submitted on May 4, 2020. See  PN1732, 
116th Congress. Billingslea was nominated in January 2019 for Under 
Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights, and 
encountered strong opposition due to his prior role in torture policy 
under President George W. Bush. See PN107, 115th Congress; Rob 
Berschinski & Benjamin Haass, ``Trump Wants a Torture Proponent to Lead 
U.S. Human Rights Policy. The Senate Should Say No,'' Politico, Sept. 
17, 2019.
    \60\ Under Secretary Thompson served from April 2018 to September 
2019, just over 16 months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretary for Europe and 
Eurasian Affairs departed in February 2019; as of July 2020, 
the Administration has yet to nominate someone to fill that 
role.\61\ The Assistant Secretary for Arms Control, 
Verification and Compliance, which works with partners to 
control the threat of weapons of mass destruction, had a 
Senate-confirmed official for just over one year, and has been 
vacant since June 2019, with no subsequent nominee.\62\ The 
Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, which 
leads the Department's public outreach and messaging, has been 
vacant since March 2018, with no nominee.\63\ There has been no 
confirmed Assistant Secretary for South and Asian Affairs for 
the entire Trump administration--a position that manages 
relations with India and Pakistan, and a region where the U.S. 
is engaged in a long-standing war.\64\ As of July 2020, more 
than half of senior Department positions have been filled by 
someone other than a Senate-confirmed official at least 
once.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \61\ Wess Mitchell resigned in February 2019. Carol Morello, ``Top 
diplomat for European affairs resigns from State Department,'' The 
Washington Post, Jan. 22, 2019.
    \62\ John Hudson & Paul Sonne, ``Senior arms control official 
resigns from State Department, aides say,'' The Washington Post, May 
13, 2019.
    \63\ The prior official, Steven Goldstein, served for just 3 
months.
    \64\ The prior Assistant Secretary departed the post in January 
2017.
    \65\ Senate Foreign Relations Committee Staff Analysis. The 37 
positions includes 6 Under Secretaries, 22 Assistant Secretary 
positions, and 9 Senate-confirmed positions that lead a bureau 
equivalent to an assistant secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Vacancies and acting posts have had serious ramifications 
for America's presence in the world, its overseas operations, 
and for U.S. national security. Senior leadership positions 
such as Assistant Secretaries are essential to formulating, 
implementing, and coordinating U.S. foreign policy. They drive 
international economic policy, oversee conflict prevention, and 
represent the United States in bilateral and multilateral 
negotiations on weapons nonproliferation.\66\ When they are 
filled in an acting capacity, they have diminished authority, 
both within the Department and with foreign counterparts.\67\ 
When the positions are vacant, the work of the entire bureau 
suffers and slows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\ See 1 FAM 130, 1 FAM 420, 1 FAM 450, 1 FAM 470.
    \67\ See, e.g., Robbie Gramer et al., ``How the Trump 
Administration Broke the State Department,'' Foreign Policy, July 31, 
2017; see also Anne Joseph O'Connell, Vacant Offices: Delays in 
Staffing Top Agency Positions, 82 Southern California Law Review, 913 
(2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further, one-quarter of 37 senior positions across the 
Department have turned over at least once since 2017.\68\ 
Others serve in dual-hatted roles. Dr. Deborah Birx, tapped to 
lead the federal COVID-19 response for the White House 
Coronavirus Task Force, also technically serves as the lead for 
the State Department's global HIV/AIDS response.\69\ Deputy 
Secretary Stephen Biegun still serves as the lead negotiator 
for North Korea.\70\ Before he ended his tenure as Ambassador 
to Germany, Ric Grenell served simultaneously as the Special 
Envoy for Serbia and Kosovo Peace Negotiations, and as Acting 
Director of National Intelligence, ostensibly holding all three 
positions at once.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \68\ Nine out of 37 positions have turned over at least once. The 
37 positions includes 6 Under Secretaries, 22 Assistant Secretary 
positions, and 9 Senate-confirmed positions that lead a bureau 
equivalent to an assistant secretary.
    \69\ Deborah L. Birx, M.D., U.S. Global Aids Coordinator & U.S. 
Special Representative for Global Health Diplomacy, U.S. Department of 
State, https://www.state.gov/biographies/deborah-l-birx-md/ (last 
visited July 1, 2020).
    \70\ See, e.g., William Gallo, ``Another Trump-Kim Meeting Before 
November? South Korea Hopes So,'' Voice of America, July 1, 2020; Josh 
Rogin, ``Trump is expected to tap North Korea envoy for deputy 
secretary of state,'' The Washington Post, Sept. 17, 2019.
    \71\ President Donald J. Trump Announces Intent to Appoint 
Individual to a Key Administration Post, The White House, Oct. 3, 2019. 
Grenell was then designated a few months later to serve as the Acting 
Director of National Intelligence. Statement from the Press Secretary, 
The White House, Feb. 20, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slow to Fill the Ranks
    Whether by design or neglect, from the outset, President 
Trump placed little value on filling some of the senior-most 
national security and foreign policy positions. The White House 
was slow to fill posts across the Administration and, by many 
accounts, lacked the traditional transition plans to enable it 
to be fully staffed quickly.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \72\ See, e.g., Robbie Gramer et al., ``How the Trump 
Administration Broke the State Department,'' Foreign Policy, July 31, 
2017; Maggie Haberman & Glenn Thrush, ``A Trump Administration, With 
Obama Staff Members `Filling In the Gaps,'' The New York Times, Jan. 
19, 2017. `` `In 21 years of covering the State Department and in eight 
years of serving there, I've seen rocky transitions . . . . but I've 
never seen anything like this,' said Strobe Talbott, the president of 
the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank, and a former 
journalist and Bill Clinton administration official.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As of October 2017, President Trump had nominated only 56 
ambassadors, compared with 81 from the same point in the Obama 
administration.\73\ Key ambassador postings remained without a 
nominee, including Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Australia. 
Out of 22 Assistant Secretary positions, 20 were either vacant 
or filled in an acting capacity, and of those, only 3 had 
nominations pending before the Senate.\74\ By November 2017, 
roughly half of the more than 150 Senate-confirmed positions at 
the State Department still had no named nominee.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \73\ As of October 1, 2017, for 22 Senate-confirmed Assistant 
Secretaries. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Staff Analysis.
    \74\ Id.; Dexter Filkins, ``Rex Tillerson at the Breaking Point,'' 
The New Yorker, Oct. 6, 2017.
    \75\ 76 out of 154 positions had no nominee (49 percent). Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee Staff Analysis, Nov. 29, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By early 2018, just over a year into the Administration, 
the numbers were not much better. As of February 2018, 8 of 22 
Assistant Secretary positions were vacant or held by those in 
an acting capacity, with no nominee, including African Affairs, 
South and Central Asian Affairs, Western Hemisphere Affairs, 
and Near Eastern Affairs.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \76\ Senate Foreign Relations Committee Staff Analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While the Administration has repeatedly tried to blame the 
lack of Senate-confirmed officials on the Senate and the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee, the Senate has moved forward 
dozens of nominees, particularly those that are adequately 
vetted and qualified. The Senate has confirmed more than 190 
nominees to the State Department under the Trump 
Administration; more than half of those were advanced by the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee after April 2018.\77\ 
Further, the Committee has continuously moved forward nominees 
promptly who have been appropriately vetted and who meet the 
standards for Senate confirmation. In 2019, for example, the 
Committee reviewed and advanced nearly 30 nominees in less than 
40 days.\78\ Many nominations take longer to advance for a 
variety of reasons: nominees frequently take one month or 
longer to submit required confirmation paperwork; the Committee 
has had to compensate for the Administration's failure to fully 
vet candidates, adding to review time; and, particularly under 
this Administration, the occurrence of missing or incorrect 
information, as well as disqualifying conduct by candidates, 
has considerably slowed the pace of the Committee's ability to 
process nominees.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \77\ Id.
    \78\ Id.
    \79\ See Chapter 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key Posts Neglected, and an Interim Team on the Field
    A number of the vacancies that President Trump failed to 
fill left holes in the U.S. presence around the globe. For 
example, even as the Administration argued that we were 
entering a new era of great-power competition with China, and 
despite an ongoing war in Afghanistan, there were no Assistant 
Secretary nominees for East or South and Central Asia until 
December 2017 and January 2019.\80\ At a time of unprecedented 
challenges from Russia, China, and ISIS in Africa, the 
Administration did not name a nominee to serve as Assistant 
Secretary for African Affairs until May 2018.\81\ In the face 
of a worsening humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, increasing 
irregular migration from Central America, and heightening 
tensions with Mexico, President Trump failed to nominate an 
Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs until March 
2018--more than 400 days into the Administration.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \80\ Susan Thornton was nominated to be Assistant Secretary for 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs in December 2017, but withdrawn in 
August 2018; Robert Williams was nominated in January 2019 to be 
Assistant Secretary for South Asian Affairs, but withdrawn in April 
2019. David Stillwell was subsequently nominated for East Asian and 
Pacific Affairs in November 2018 and confirmed in June 2019. There has 
been no subsequent nominee for South Asian Affairs. See PN6, PN141 
(116th Congress); PN1327, PN1386, PN2580 (115th Congress).
    \81\ Eli Okun, ``White House taps nominees for major Africa 
posts,'' Politico, May 10, 2018.
    \82\ Senate Foreign Relations Committee Staff Analysis. As of 
November 1, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Other vacancies appeared to reflect the Administration's 
lack of interest in advancing certain policy priorities, 
including having Senate-confirmed officials to lead the U.S. 
engagement on climate and environment issues. Consistent with 
President Trump's disregard for climate change and 
environmental issues, he did not nominate anyone to serve as 
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment 
until January 2019.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \83\ See Nadja Popovich et al., ``95 Environmental Rules Being 
Rolled Back Under Trump,'' The New York Times, Dec. 21, 2019; Keith 
Krach, Nominee to be an Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, 
Energy, and the Environment, PN 260 (116th Congress), nominated Jan. 
24, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At his nomination hearing in April 2018, then-nominee for 
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged that:


        At the State Department, there are too many holes, too 
        many vacancies, too many unfilled positions. When that 
        happens, everyone is stretched thin in the subject 
        matter expertise that we need to deliver America's 
        diplomacy around the world, to conduct its mission, its 
        humanitarian missions, its development missions. Each 
        of the missions which are entrusted to the State 
        Department require talented people on station doing 
        their part, working alongside it.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \84\ Nomination Hearing of Mike Pompeo to be Secretary of State, 
before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Apr. 12, 2018.


    Yet, despite his recognition of how vacant posts hamper the 
Department's effectiveness, under Secretary Pompeo's 
leadership, the Administration has continued to struggle to 
nominated qualified individuals, and, once they have people in 
place, to keep key posts filled. By October 2018, the White 
House still had failed to nominate anyone for 5 of 37 key 
senior Senate?confirmed State Department leadership positions 
and more than two dozen ambassadorial posts.\85\ In late 2018, 
more than 25 countries--including Egypt, Libya, Mexico, Qatar, 
Saudi Arabia, and Thailand--had no ambassadorial nominee.\86\ 
At the end of 2018, only 2 out of 6 Under Secretary positions 
were filled by Senate-confirmed officials.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \85\ Senate Foreign Relations Committee Analysis. For the 37 senior 
positions in the State Department, five positions did not have a single 
nomination before October 2018.
    \86\ Senate Foreign Relations Committee Analysis.
    \87\ As of December 2018. Senate Foreign Relations Committee 
Analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By mid-2019, the Administration had failed to nominate 
individuals or fill vacancies for at least 28 Senate-confirmed 
positions, including 16 ambassadorial posts. Among those were 
the head of South and Central Asian Affairs, for which the 
Administration's nominee withdrew; the head of the Europe and 
Eurasian Affairs, the State Department's most senior Europe 
official, which has not had a Senate-confirmed official since 
February 2019; and Ambassadors to Estonia, Georgia, and 
Ukraine--three countries on the front line in the fight against 
Russian aggression.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \88\ Wess Mitchell, the former Senate-confirmed Assistant 
Secretary, departed in February 2019. Carol Morello, ``Top diplomat for 
European affairs resigns from State Department,'' The Washington Post, 
Jan. 22, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Key positions have been filled by non-Senate-confirmed 
officials for extended periods. As of mid-2020, the Bureau of 
International Organization Affairs has been led by officials in 
an acting capacity for more than a year and a half; the Bureau 
of South and Central Asian Affairs has been led by non-Senate-
confirmed officials for almost three and a half years. As of 
the time of publication, more than 20 posts, including 2 Under 
Secretaries, 6 Assistant Secretaries, the Inspector General, 
and more than 12 Ambassadors, are vacant and have no 
nominee.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \89\ This does not include the announced resignation of Michael 
Evanoff, Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, who announced on 
July 14, 2020 that he was leaving the Department effective July 24, 
2020. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As of July 2020, there is no Senate-confirmed ambassador 
and no nominee for Afghanistan, Germany, Honduras, or Qatar. 
Others have gone long stretches without a nominee; Panama went 
two years without an ambassador until a nominee was named in 
May 2020.\90\ Ukraine, on the front lines of Kremlin 
aggression, has not had an ambassador since April 2019.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \90\ Erik Bethel was nominated on May 4, 2020. PN1731 (116th 
Congress).
    \91\ Keith Dayton was nominated on May 14, 2020. PN1901 (116th 
Congress).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The cumulative effect spills into U.S. engagement abroad 
and impact our relationships with host nations. If foreign 
counterparts know that only an acting official is available, 
or, due to a vacancy, a deputy assistant secretary, they may 
forego a bilateral meeting rather than meet with someone who 
lacks the authority to make decisions and the backing of the 
President. Without an ambassador selected by the president and 
representing the administration with full authority, the 
relationship, and America's leverage, suffers. As former U.S. 
Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, Barbara Leaf, noted: 
``Places like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt are very status-
conscious societies. Say you have a problem in Turkey: Who can 
pick up the phone and call [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] 
Erdogan? A good ambassador can do that; a charge [the second-
in-command at the embassy] can't.''\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \92\ Doyle McManus, ``Almost Half the Top Jobs in Trump's State 
Department Are Still Empty,'' The Atlantic, Nov. 4, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hiring Freeze Compounded Staffing Gaps
    The Department's ability to fill posts was made even more 
difficult by the Administration's ill-considered hiring 
freeze--put in place for all of the federal government in 
January 2017, but remaining in place until May 2018 at the 
State Department. The freeze, on top of the significant 
vacancies, has reverberated through the Department and 
continued to pose hiring challenges.\93\ The freeze prevented 
the Department from hiring or promoting civil service employees 
or locally-employed embassy staff, resulting in a 7 percent 
decline in civil service workforce and a 20 percent decline in 
local embassy staff over the course of the freeze, who are 
critical to carrying out overseas functions and missions.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \93\ See Mark Sandy, Office of Management and Budget, ``Memorandum 
for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies,'' M-17-17, (Jan. 25, 
2017); Eric Katz, ``After 16 Months, State Department Ends Hiring 
Freeze,'' Government Executive, May 15, 2018.
    \94\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of the Effects of the Department of State Hiring Freeze, at 1 (Aug. 
2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A State Department Inspector General (OIG) review found 
that the freeze hampered core functions, including providing 
services to U.S. citizens abroad, and adversely impacted their 
ability to maintain embassy security.\95\ The OIG reported that 
``[s]everal bureaus charged with protecting security, health, 
and life safety reported to OIG that the hiring freeze had 
significant detrimental effects on their operations.''\96\ For 
example, the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations reported 
that it conducted 22 percent fewer overseas safety, health, and 
environmental management inspections in 2018 than in 2016 due 
to freeze-related staffing shortages.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \95\ Id. at 10.
    \96\ Id. at 9.
    \97\ Id. at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A stunning 96 percent of embassies and consulates and 95 
percent of bureaus and offices responding to the OIG reported 
that the freeze had a negative effect on their overall 
operations.\98\ Several bureaus and overseas posts noted 
negative effects on employee welfare stemming from the hiring 
freeze, including an excessive workload leading to staff 
burnout.\99\ A separate review of the Bureau of Democracy, 
Human Rights, and Labor revealed that the hiring freeze 
hindered its ability to adequately respond to increased 
workload, including on the Bureau's critical role in Leahy 
vetting--the screening of U.S. security assistance recipients 
to prevent funds from going to security forces that have 
committed gross violations of human rights.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \98\ Id. at 8. Of embassies, 151 responded; and 38 bureaus or 
offices responded. Id. App. B.
    \99\ Id. at 9-10, 19.
    \100\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, 
Inspection of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, at 5 
(Oct. 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Another separate review found that the Bureau of 
Counterterrorism was unable to establish and fill four 
positions in the Office of Terrorist Detentions for more than 
two years, in part due to the hiring freeze. In late 2019, the 
Bureau reported that more than 20 percent (20 out of 92) of its 
civil servant positions were vacant, owing partly due to 
backlogs in hiring carried over from the hiring freeze, despite 
the fact that the freeze had ended approximately 18 months 
earlier.\101\ As of December 2018, the Bureau of Human 
Resources estimated it would take approximately two years to 
fill Civil Service vacancies created by the freeze.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \101\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, 
Inspection of the Bureau of Counterterrorism, at 11 (May 2020).
    \102\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of the Effects of the Department of State Hiring Freeze, at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loss of Expertise
    In addition to vacant positions and turnover, the 
Department has witnessed a number of departures during the 
first three and a half years of the Trump administration, 
including some of the most experienced career personnel, as 
well as those in mid-level positions who had yet to climb into 
leadership ranks. Many career officials or second-in-command 
who would have traditionally been promoted to a senior position 
or ambassadorship have instead left or felt forced out.
    Particularly in the first two years of the Trump 
administration, a number of senior officials departed, whether 
by choice, due to policy disagreements, or because they were 
sidelined and not offered other senior roles.\103\ Following a 
series of expected, but abrupt, departures in the first few 
days of the Administration, additional senior departures 
followed during the subsequent months and years--including the 
Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Tom Shannon, who served 
until June 2018; U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, Roberta Jacobson, 
who served until May 2018; Special Envoy for the Global 
Coalition to Counter the Islamic State of Iraq, Brett McGurk, 
who served until December 2018, among others. As former Under 
Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns and 
former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan, Ryan Crocker, 
lamented in late 2017, such departures amounted to the ``most 
significant departure of diplomatic talent in 
generations.''\104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \103\ Gardiner Harris, ``Diplomats Sound the Alarm as They Are 
Pushed Out in Droves,'' The New York Times, Nov. 24, 2017. Even before 
Tillerson was confirmed as Secretary, his staff fired six of the State 
Department's top career diplomats, including Patrick Kennedy, who had 
been appointed to his position by President George W. Bush. Kristie 
Kenney, the Department's counselor and one of just five career 
ambassadors, was fired a few weeks later. None were given any reason 
for their dismissals. Id.
    \104\ Nicholas Burns & Ryan C. Crocker, Dismantling the Foreign 
Service, The New York Times, Nov. 27, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Department has also lost early- and mid-career staff at 
alarming levels. Between July 2017 and June 2018, 722 full-
time, non-seasonal employees left--about 7 percent of the 
Department's total staff, and the fourth-highest rate among 
major agencies.\105\ Some left because they felt they could no 
longer defend U.S. policies, and were, as a former Foreign 
Service Officer wrote in a public op-ed, ``struggling to 
explain to foreign peoples the blatant contradictions at 
home.''\106\ Others found a particular breaking point or policy 
decision they no longer felt they could implement.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \105\ Charles S. Clark, ``State Department Under Pompeo Still 
Coping with Vacancies: Just more than half of top jobs are filled as 
Trump's third year approaches,'' Government Executive, Dec. 17, 2018. 
The three major agencies with higher departure rates than State were 
HUD, Education, and HHS.
    \106\ Chuck Park, ``I can no longer justify being a part of Trump's 
`Complacent State.' So I'm resigning,'' The Washington Post, Aug. 8, 
2019. See also Steve Inskeep, ``Ex-State Department Diplomat Criticizes 
Trump's State Department,'' NPR, Sept. 24, 2018 (quoting Uzra Zeya, 
former Deputy Chief of Mission at U.S. Embassy Paris: ``The real 
question was--could I continue to do good, as I define it, in my role 
serving this president? And I reached the conclusion, simply, that I 
could not.'').
    \107\ David Rank, ``Why I resigned from the Foreign Service after 
27 years,'' The Washington Post, June 23, 2017, (``When the 
administration decided to withdraw from the Paris agreement on climate 
change, however, I concluded that, as a parent, patriot and Christian, 
I could not in good conscience be involved in any way, no matter how 
small, with the implementation of that decision.''); Rukmini Callimachi 
& Eric Schmitt, ``Splitting With Trump Over Syria, American Leading 
ISIS Fight Steps Down,'' The New York Times, Dec. 22, 2018 (``I 
ultimately concluded that I could not carry out these new instructions 
and maintain my integrity.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The removal and turnover of deputy chiefs of mission (DCMs) 
in particular has been notable. DCMs are vital to a well-
functioning embassy, possessing years of diplomatic experience 
and regional expertise. As second-in-command of a diplomatic 
mission, they are responsible for the day-to-day management and 
are expected to help ensure continuity and leadership.\108\ 
U.S. embassies in Canada, Iceland, Romania, France, the United 
Kingdom, and South Africa have all seen changes in this 
position.\109\ The rate at which DCMs are being removed, and 
the reasoning behind the removals, has created cause for 
concern.\110\ Eric Rubin, President of the American Foreign 
Service Association stated that the removal of DCMs is becoming 
an ``epidemic.''\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \108\ G.R. Berridge et al., The Palgrave MacMillan Dictionary of 
Diplomacy, at 94 (Jan. 2012); Robbie Gramer, ``At Embassies Abroad, 
Trump Envoys Are Quietly Pushing Out Career Diplomats,'' Foreign 
Policy, Feb. 5, 2020.
    \109\ Robbie Gramer, ``At Embassies Abroad, Trump Envoys Are 
Quietly Pushing Out Career Diplomats,'' Foreign Policy, Feb. 5, 2020.
    \110\ See, e.g., Julia Ioffe, ``Trump Is Waging War on America's 
Diplomats,'' GQ, Dec. 3, 2019.
    \111\ Robbie Gramer, ``At Embassies Abroad, Trump Envoys Are 
Quietly Pushing Out Career Diplomats,'' Foreign Policy, Feb. 5, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the process, the Department lost significant 
institutional knowledge and substantive experience. By the end 
of 2017, the Foreign Service Officer corps had lost 60 percent 
of its Career Ambassadors, the Department's most knowledgeable 
and experienced professionals.\112\ By early 2018, there was 
only single senior career official with the Department 
equivalent of a four-star general, down from six at the end of 
2016.\113\ As Ambassador Barbara Stephenson, then-President of 
the American Foreign Service Association, said pointedly: 
``Were the U.S. military to face such a decapitation of its 
leadership ranks, I would expect a public outcry.''\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \112\ Ambassador Barbara Stephenson, ``Time to Ask Why,'' The 
Foreign Service Journal, Dec. 2017.
    \113\ Ambassador Barbara Stephenson, ``President's Views,'' The 
Foreign Service Journal, Mar. 2018.
    \114\ Ambassador Barbara Stephenson, ``Time to Ask Why,'' The 
Foreign Service Journal, Dec. 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The damage was also done to early- and mid-career 
employees. One former Foreign Service Officer noted ``the 
growing exodus of entry-level and midlevel officers, who take 
with us ground-level expertise that is difficult to 
replace.''\115\ The departure of senior experienced experts 
means that there are more junior employees who lack senior 
mentorship. Nancy McEldowney, a former ambassador who retired 
in June 2019 after a 30-year career in the Foreign Service, 
observed: ``There's a vacuum throughout the State Department, 
and the junior people now working in these top jobs lack the 
confidence and credibility that comes from a presidential 
nomination and Senate confirmation.''\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \115\ Bethany Milton, ``My Final Break with the Trump State 
Department: What is there left to defend to foreign audiences, other 
than a promise that we're a democracy and that there are future 
elections to come?'' The New York Times, Aug. 26, 2019.
    \116\ Gardiner Harris, ``Diplomats Sound the Alarm as They Are 
Pushed Out in Droves,'' The New York Times, Nov. 24, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to the resignation letter of one career Foreign 
Service Officer, the Trump administration's ``stinging 
disrespect'' for the Department's diplomatic work drove away 
experienced and talented staff.\117\ Others similarly described 
a ``complete and utter disdain for our expertise'' and a 
``contempt'' for career employees.\118\ Many diplomats and 
career employees were asking ``if their service is still 
valued.''\119\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \117\ Dan De Luce & Robbie Gramer, ``U.S. Diplomat's Resignation 
Signals Wider Exodus From State Department, Foreign Policy (citing 
resignation letter of Elizabeth Shackelford, former Foreign Service 
Office for U.S Mission to Somalia, based in Nairobi).
    \118\ Roger Cohen, ``The Desperation of Our Diplomats,'' The New 
York Times, July 28, 2017 (citing former Ambassador to Qatar Dana Shell 
Smith); Jack Corrigan, The Hollowing-Out of the State Department 
Continues, The Atlantic, Feb. 11, 2018.
    \119\ Roger Cohen, ``The Desperation of Our Diplomats,'' The New 
York Times, July 28, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
    The lack of senior Department officials and personnel 
attrition levels doesn't just mean empty desks. It translates 
to a lack of U.S. leadership on the global stage. If senior 
officials are unable to engage with counterparts--with allies 
and adversaries alike, in the field in global hotspots or in 
meeting rooms of multilateral organizations--there is a ``slow 
degradation of America's global leadership.''\120\ As former 
Under Secretary of State under President George W. Bush, R. 
Nicholas Burns, said: ``The United States is at the center of 
every crisis around the world, and you simply cannot be 
effective if you don't have assistant secretaries and 
ambassadors in place . . . It shows a disdain for 
diplomacy.''\121\ Put another way, as former Ambassador to 
Qatar Dana Shell Smith said, ``having so many vacancies in 
essential places is a disaster waiting to happen.''\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \120\ Dexter Filkins, ``Rex Tillerson at the Breaking Point,'' The 
New Yorker, Oct. 6, 2017.
    \121\ Gardiner Harris, ``Diplomats Sound the Alarm as They Are 
Pushed Out in Droves,'' The New York Times, Nov. 24, 2017.
    \122\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Indeed, other countries have noticed the disempowerment of 
the State Department under President Trump. For example, former 
Foreign Minister of Ukraine Vadim Pristayko reminisced in a 
November 2019 interview about the level of interaction with the 
United States that had existed under former Assistant Secretary 
of State for Europe and Eurasia Victoria Nuland.\123\ Pristayko 
said, ``I think we need to go back to the format that was under 
Nuland, when she had the full power of the State Department 
behind her.''\124\ In another notable example, also in November 
2019, Publimetro Colombia released audio of Colombia's 
Ambassador to the United States, Francisco Santos, and 
Colombia's Foreign Minister-designate, Claudia Blum, recorded 
in a DC cafe by an unnamed third party.\125\ In offering advice 
about navigating the Washington power structure, Ambassador 
Santos said: ``The U.S. State Department, which used to be 
important, is destroyed, it doesn't exist.''\126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \123\ ``Pristaiko believes that it is necessary to abolish the 
position of Special Representative to Ukraine,'' LB.ua, Nov. 14, 2019, 
https://lb.ua/news/2019/11/14/442240--pristayko--schitaet--nuzhno.html.
    \124\ Id.
    \125\ Jim Wyss, ``Colombian diplomats spill the beans on 
`destroyed,' U.S. State Department in secret recording,'' Miami Herald, 
Nov. 21, 2019.
    \126\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The State Department's lack of senior level leadership with 
Senate-confirmation vested authority and legitimacy, coupled 
with the hollowing out of its ranks at all levels, exacerbates 
a declining diplomatic network from President Trump's harmful 
leadership. When the United States does not lead 
diplomatically, it weakens America's ability to pursue U.S. 
national interests and promote American values abroad.


                             Chapter 2

   The Trump Administration's Record on Diplomatic Nominees: Repeated
                    Vetting Failures, Poor Judgement

                              ----------                              

        Unqualified political appointees have been with us long 
        before Donald Trump. As in so many areas, what he's 
        done is accelerated that problem and made it a lot 
        worse.

                                                    --William Burns
                              Former Deputy Secretary of State\127\


    \127\ Id. George Packer, ``The President Is Winning His War on 
American Institutions,'' The Atlantic, Apr. 2020.


    American diplomats are given tremendous responsibility by 
our government; with a few exceptions, they are in charge of 
all U.S. government employees in their host country--often 
numbering in the hundreds. Ambassadors are America's face to 
the world; they represent the United States and are responsible 
for protecting and advancing our national interests with 
foreign governments, societies, and international 
organizations. It is for this reason that our nation's founders 
saw fit to specify in the Constitution that, while presidents 
nominate ambassadors, they can only serve with the advice and 
consent of the Senate.
    Senior Department officials oversee the execution of 
programs worth millions--and sometimes billions--of dollars. 
They lead skilled groups of professionals that have dedicated 
their careers to serving the American people. They help shape, 
and drive U.S. foreign policy. If these individuals do not have 
the temperament to manage a team of diverse employees, or the 
decorum to interact with officials in a foreign country, they 
should not be selected for the job. If they have offensive 
conduct, statements, or associations in their past, they should 
be disqualified from representing the United States.
    Yet, too many of President Trump's nominees for senior 
State Department positions and ambassadorial posts have shown 
themselves to be unequal to the task. Some have misled Congress 
during their nomination process; some have made statements that 
do not reflect American values; others have behaved in ways 
that do not befit a position of significant power and public 
trust. While it is true that every administration has its share 
of questionable appointments, the Trump administration's 
choices have gone beyond the pale, jeopardizing the 
Department's ability to safeguard our nation's interests.
    This chapter recounts an illustrative group of such 
nominations. These examples are by no means exhaustive, nor do 
they capture the full scope of the challenges to the proper 
stewardship of American foreign policy that the 
Administration's nominees present. With each unfit nominee, the 
Administration sends a clear message: that responsible 
leadership, sound judgment, and experience are not a 
prerequisite for serving in a senior national security 
position; that career employees are not deserving of fair 
treatment; that diplomacy is not worthy of the best America has 
to offer.
Lowering the Bar
    The Senate has a constitutionally-mandated role to consider 
presidential nominees for advice and consent.\128\ The Senate's 
role is to ensure that presidential nominees are sufficiently 
qualified and suited for the positions to which they have been 
nominated. Ambassadors, for example, should ``possess clearly 
demonstrated competence to perform the duties of a chief of 
mission.''\129\ While this and past administrations have often 
filled certain ambassadorships with individuals selected due to 
political affiliation, nominees should still meet certain 
minimum standards of qualification, character, and moral 
fitness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \128\ 128 U.S. Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 2.
    \129\ Foreign Service Act of 1980, Section 304(a), Pub. L. No. 96-
465, 94 Stat. 2071 (1980). The Act also recommends that, given these 
qualifications, ``positions as chief of mission should normally be 
accorded to career members of the Service, though circumstance will 
warrant appointments from time to time of qualified individuals who are 
not career members of the Service,'' and ``contributions to political 
campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as 
a chief of mission.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The White House is supposed to serve as a gatekeeper to 
ensure that only qualified, experienced, and honest individuals 
have the honor of representing our nation abroad. Instead, the 
Trump administration has largely abdicated this responsibility 
and nominated individuals who would have been eliminated from 
consideration by previous White Houses and whom prior 
presidents would not have submitted to the Senate for advice 
and consent.\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \130\ See, e.g., Brett Samuels, ``Trump says media is part of 
vetting his nominees: `We save a lot of money that way,' '' The Hill, 
Aug. 2, 2019; Evan Osnos, ``Trump vs. the `Deep State': How the 
Administration's loyalists are quietly reshaping American governance,'' 
The New Yorker, May 14, 2018. ``To vet candidates, the Obama campaign 
had used a questionnaire with sixty-three queries about employment, 
finances, writings, and social-media posts. The Trump team cut the 
number of questions to twenty-five by dropping the requests for 
professional references and tax returns and removing items concerning 
loans, personal income, and real-estate holdings. The questionnaire was 
speckled with typos, and seemed carelessly put together. Robert Rizzi, 
a prominent lawyer who has helped with every transition since Bill 
Clinton took office, told The New Yorker, ``They would call it `the 
paperwork.' We'd say, `Well, it takes months.' They'd say, `Just to do 
paperwork?' I'd say, `It has huge consequences if you do it wrong.' '' 
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Either intentionally or negligently, the Trump 
administration has substantially lowered the entry requirements 
for foreign relations nominees. Some have submitted files to 
the Committee that are so rife with errors or omissions it 
appears they are not taking the process or the position 
seriously. Others have failed or refused to disclose details 
about their background, such as lawsuits and serious 
complaints, that bear on their fitness for Senate 
confirmation--despite the fact that reviewing details of a 
nominee's background is a key component of the nomination 
process. Others are nominated by the White House despite having 
made offensive and vicious public statements that have no place 
in our government, much less foreign diplomacy.
    One Republican Senate office even sarcastically invited a 
nominee to ``put on his tinfoil hat and visit our office with 
evidence for his salacious conspiracy theories and cuckoo 
allegations.''\131\ While that particular nomination stalled in 
the Senate, other nominees have been confirmed by a Senate 
majority intent on putting President Trump's nominees in place, 
no matter the damage and cost. Many have continued to serve in 
senior Department posts, even after concerns about their past 
conduct or statements were raised during the nomination 
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \131\ Don Walton, ``Sasse Office to Trump Ambassador Nominee: Bring 
Your Tinfoil Hat,'' Lincoln Journal Star, Feb. 6, 2018 (referring to 
Leandro Rizzuto, see later in this chapter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These vetting failures have meant that under the Trump 
administration, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 
particularly members and staff of the minority, have dedicated 
significantly more resources than in the past to ensuring that 
nominees meet certain minimum standards and do not jeopardize 
the reputation or security of the United States.
Misrepresenting Prior Experience
    The nomination of Mina Chang to be an Assistant 
Administrator for Asia at the U.S. Agency for International 
Development (USAID) is a case study in how little vetting the 
Trump administration appears to do of its own senior officials. 
Chang, with scant development, management, or budget 
experience, was nominated to a position that oversees a 
billion-dollar portfolio and more than one thousand 
employees.\132\ In April 2019, while awaiting confirmation, 
Chang was appointed to serve in the State Department as a 
Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Conflict and 
Stability Operations, a senior position just one level below 
those requiring Senate confirmation.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \132\ Mina Chang, Nominee to be Assistant Administrator, United 
States Agency for International Development, PN2528, (115th Congress).
    \133\ Denise Natali, Assistant Secretary-Bureau of Conflict & 
Stabilization Operations, @CSOAsstSec, ``I am happy to welcome Mina 
Chang as #CSO's Deputy Assistant Secretary. DAS Chang brings her 
expertise in foreign assistance, data science and emerging technologies 
to help CSO inform US policies, strategies, & programs in 
#conflictprevention & #stabilization.'' https://twitter.com/CSOAsstSec/
status/1122988331627950080?s=20, Apr. 29, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During the vetting process, Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee staff raised a number of questions about Chang's 
suitability for the USAID position, including whether her use 
of funds connected to a non-profit she had run was 
appropriate.\134\ In addition, in November 2019, NBC News, 
reported that Chang had embellished her resume with misleading 
claims about her professional background. For example, Chang 
had reportedly inflated her educational achievements and 
exaggerated the scope of her nonprofit's work.\135\ She also 
claimed that she had held a position on a United Nations panel 
that did not exist, falsely claimed she had addressed both the 
Democratic and Republican national conventions, and implied she 
had testified before Congress when she had not.\136\ Chang had 
also claimed that a Time magazine cover with her face on it was 
a result of recognition for her non-profit work, when in fact 
the cover was fake.\137\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \134\ Chang was the founder and CEO of Linking the World, a non-
profit organization that claims to ``create broad awareness of 
America's unique role in the world.'' Linking the World, ``Advocacy,'' 
https://www.linkingtheworld.org/advocacy (last visited Mar. 4, 2020).
    \135\ Dan De Luce et al., ``Senior Trump official embellished 
resume, had face on fake Time cover: State Dept. official Mina Chang 
claimed to be a Harvard Business School `alumna' who ran a nonprofit 
that worked in 40 countries,'' NBC News, Nov. 12, 2019.
    \136\ Dan De Luce et al., ``Senior Trump official embellished 
resume, had face on fake Time cover,'' NBC News, Nov. 12, 2019.
    \137\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Neither the Administration nor Chang responded to requests 
from the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations for documents 
and details about Chang's use of her non-profit's funds, but 
the Administration withdrew her nomination following those 
requests.\138\ Six days after public reporting on her 
misrepresented credentials, Chang resigned from her Deputy 
Assistant Secretary position.\139\ Yet, until her resignation, 
she was serving as a senior State Department official, 
reportedly with a top secret clearance that gave her access to 
sensitive intelligence, arguably making her vulnerable to 
blackmail by any foreign intelligence service that might have 
bothered to research her credentials.\140\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \138\ Id.
    \139\ Dan De Luce et al., ``Senior Trump admin official Mina Chang 
resigns after embellishing resume: Mina Chang resigned Monday, six days 
after an NBC News, report about her resume inflation and hours after 
NBC asked her about newly discovered false claims,'' NBC News, Nov. 18, 
2019.
    \140\ Reis Thebault, ``Trump appointee accused of inflating resume, 
faking a Time cover pushes back in resignation letter,'' The Washington 
Post, Nov. 18, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misleading the Senate about Matters
    under Federal Investigation
    The Administration withdrew the nomination of Kathleen 
Troia (K.T.) McFarland from the Senate after she appeared to 
mislead the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about her 
knowledge of the Trump transition team's contacts with Russian 
officials.\141\ McFarland had worked closely with former 
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty in 
December 2017 to lying to the FBI about his interactions with 
the then-Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak.\142\ In 
response to a question by Senator Booker about whether 
McFarland had ever spoken with Flynn about Flynn's contacts 
with Kislyak, McFarland responded that she was ``not aware of 
any of the issues or events described.''\143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \141\ Kathleen Troia McFarland, Nominee for Ambassador to 
Singapore, PN605 (115th Congress), PN1437 (115th Congress), (nominated, 
June 15, 2017, withdrawn, Feb. 5, 2018).
    \142\ Michael D. Shear & Adam Goldman, ``Michael Flynn Pleads 
Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate With Russia Inquiry,'' 
The New York Times, Dec. 1, 2017. As of the time of publication, the 
state of the case against Mr. Flynn was the subject of ongoing 
litigation. See, e.g., Charlie Savage, ``Appeals Court Panel Orders End 
to Michael Flynn Case,'' The New York Times, June 24, 2020.
    \143\ Nomination Hearing of Kathleen Troia McFarland, Responses to 
Additional Questions for the Record submitted by Senator Booker, Senate 
Committee on Foreign Relations, July 20, 2017, Nomination Hearings of 
the 115th Congress-1st Session, S. Hrg. 115-413 at 486.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, emails obtained by The New York Times in December 
2017 indicated otherwise.\144\ Further, Special Counsel Robert 
Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 
U.S. presidential election found that McFarland and Flynn 
discussed sanctions before the phone call, and that ``they both 
understood that Flynn would relay a message to Kislyak in hopes 
of making sure the situation would not get out of hand.''\145\ 
In a public interview in 2020, McFarland further contradicted 
her statements to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when 
she said that she ``talked to General Flynn before he had this 
phone call. I talked to him right afterwards. He told me what 
he was going to say. He told me what he said.''\146\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \144\ Gardiner Harris, ``K.T. McFarland Withdraws Her Nomination to 
Be Ambassador to Singapore,'' The New York Times Feb. 2, 2018.
    \145\ Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, Report on the 
Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential 
Election, Vol. I, at 167, 170 (Mar. 2019).
    \146\ K.T. McFarland, Interview, ``The Story with Martha 
MacCallum,'' Fox News, May 29, 2020. The Committee provided McFarland 
numerous opportunities to correct the record and her statements, but 
she refused to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive, Extremist, and Racist Actions
    A number of Trump administration nominees have been 
nominated for ambassadorships despite a history of making 
statements that, in previous administrations, would serve as an 
automatic disqualifier for any senior diplomatic post. 
Nonetheless, several such nominees have been confirmed over 
Democratic objections.
    Prior to being nominated to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to 
Barbados, Leandro Rizzuto Jr., made a number of statements 
advancing fringe conspiracy theories and attacking President 
Trump's political opponents.\147\ During the 2016 presidential 
campaign, Rizzuto used his Twitter account to launch and 
amplify vicious and unfounded attacks on Trump's rivals, 
including insults against their family members and sexist 
comments about spouses.\148\ Some of his false and derogatory 
claims were against U.S. Senators, including some who sit on 
the Committee responsible for reviewing his nomination.\149\ 
First nominated in January 2018, Mr. Rizzuto's nomination did 
not move forward due to bipartisan opposition. The 
Administration re-nominated him in 2019; his nomination was 
sent back twice to the White House by the Senate.\150\ The 
Administration did not give up, however. In May 2020, the 
Administration appointed him as the most senior official at the 
U.S. Consulate in Bermuda, clearly circumventing the 
Senate.\151\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \147\ Nathan McDermott & Andrew Kaczynski, ``Trump ambassador 
nominee promoted fringe conspiracy theories on Twitter,'' CNN, Feb. 5, 
2018; Leandro Rizzuto, Nominee to be U.S Ambassador to Barbados, PN1379 
(115th Congress), PN136 (116th Congress).
    \148\ Nathan McDermott & Andrew Kaczynski, ``Trump ambassador 
nominee promoted fringe conspiracy theories on Twitter,'' CNN, Feb. 5, 
2018.
    \149\ Id.
    \150\ Leandro Rizzuto, Nominee to be U.S Ambassador to Barbados, 
PN1379 (115th Congress), PN136 (116th Congress). His nomination was 
most recently returned in January 2020.
    \151\ Morgan Ortagus, Spokesperson, U.S. Department of State, ``Lee 
Rizzuto To Become Principal Officer at the U.S. Consulate General in 
Bermuda,'' May 27, 2020; Zachary Cohen & Andrew Kaczynski, ``Trump 
administration taps failed ambassador nominee who spread fringe 
conspiracies for diplomatic post,'' CNN, May 27, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Kyle McCarter, who was confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to 
Kenya in January 2019, tweeted on Election Night 2016, 
``Hillary for prison. No, really!''\152\ At his confirmation 
hearing, when asked about the tweet, he replied, ``you know, 
there is a hype in an election that we make--you know, and we 
question. And I did pose the question. And perhaps that was not 
called for, but I will tell you, I did pose the 
question.''\153\ Pressed further, McCarter said, ``perhaps it 
is one of those tweets that you would like to reel in, but you 
cannot. And that was one of those.'' As Ambassador, McCarter 
continued his offensive social media posts, tweeting about the 
``Wuhan flu,'' a racially and ethnically stigmatizing term for 
the COVID-19 pandemic pushed by the Trump administration, 
drawing fierce criticism and raising concerns about the 
potential to further inflame already documented rising racial 
tension and discrimination against Asians in Kenya.\154\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \152\ ``Conservative Nominee Tapped for Post in Kenya Gets Grilling 
from Dems,'' The Charleston Chronicle, Aug. 14, 2018.
    \153\ Kyle McCarter, Hearing on Nominations, Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee, July 18, 2018.
    \154\ Kyle McCarter, @USAmbKenya, ``Only a fraction of the wananchi 
are wearing masks & social distancing! None of us know the magnitude of 
this Wuhan flu but we must take basic known wise precautions. It is 
only for a short time. We will come back to Prosperity & a culture of 
Kenya closeness soon. #USAMarafiki''; ``U.S. ambassador in Kenya 
ignites outrage over virus criticism,'' The New York Times, Apr. 20, 
2020; ``Letter from Africa: The spread of coronavirus prejudice in 
Kenya,'' BBC News, Mar. 9, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Before being confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Slovenia, 
Lynda Blanchard shared articles on Facebook that made false 
claims about Democratic politicians.\155\ She once shared an 
article titled, ``The Clinton `Body Count' expands--5 
Mysterious deaths in the Last 6 Weeks.''\156\ On Election Day 
2016, Blanchard posted on Facebook, ``May God our Father paint 
this country red with the Blood of Jesus!''\157\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \155\ Emily R. Siegel et al., ``Donors to the Trump inaugural 
committee got ambassador nominations. But are they qualified?'' NBC 
News, April 3, 2019.
    \156\ Emily R. Siegel et al., ``Donors to the Trump inaugural 
committee got ambassador nominations. But are they qualified?'' NBC 
News, April 3, 2019.
    \157\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    President Trump's nominees have also attempted to conceal 
their participation in past racist actions. In 1994, Trump's 
nominee for Ambassador to Norway, Mark Burkhalter, was involved 
in the creation of a racist campaign flyer that distorted a 
photograph of a Black politician to darken some of his 
features, give him a prominent afro, make his lips larger, and 
warp one of his eyes.\158\ According to court filings, 
Burkhalter delivered the materials for the flyer, directed that 
it be attributed to a fake political action committee with a 
fake mailing address, authorized payment for some of its 
printing costs, and approved its release.\159\ Burkhalter was 
sued for libel and, after nearly a year of court proceedings, 
settled the lawsuit for a monetary payment and signed a letter 
of admission taking ``full responsibility'' for the flyer.\160\ 
As a result of his involvement with the flyer, Burkhalter faced 
charges from the Georgia State Ethics Commission; those 
proceedings also lasted nearly a year and resulted in 
Burkhalter signing a consent order that he personally 
authorized payment for the flyer, failed to properly disclose 
the payment, and agreed that he violated Georgia law and would 
pay a civil penalty.\161\ Burkhalter's original conduct was 
reprehensible, but he further demonstrated his lack of fitness 
to serve as an ambassador by failing to disclose the lawsuit 
and ethics charges to the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee.\162\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \158\ Conor Finnegan, ``Trump ambassador nominee must withdraw over 
role in 'racist' flyer, Democrat demands,'' ABC News, July 3, 2020.
    \159\ John Hudson, ``Trump's pick for ambassador involved in racist 
smear against black politician,'' The Washington Post, July 2, 2020.
    \160\ Jennifer Hansler, ``Top Democrat urges White House to 
withdraw ambassador pick involved in racist ad targeting Black 
politician,'' CNN, July 3, 2020.
    \161\ Letter from Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member 
Robert Menendez to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, July 2, 
2020.
    \162\ As of the publication of this report, Mr. Burkhalter's 
nomination was still pending before the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Inappropriate Conduct
    Nominees who have demonstrated conduct that falls far short 
of the minimum standards to be a U.S. diplomat have nonetheless 
received ambassadorial nominations. For instance, Christine 
Toretti, nominated in May 2018 to serve as U.S. Ambassador to 
Malta, had been subject to a restraining order after she left a 
bullet-riddled target sheet on an acquaintance's chair.\163\ 
Although the President re-nominated her in 2019, he did not 
nominate her again in 2020.\164\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \163\ Patrick Finley, ``Tucson doctor gets restraining order 
against Olson's ex-wife,'' Arizona Daily Star, Nov. 6, 2008; Christine 
J. Toretti, Nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Malta, PN2032 (115th 
Congress), PN145 (116th Congress).
    \164\ Christine J. Toretti, Nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Malta, 
PN2032 (115th Congress), PN145 (116th Congress).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
    These are but a few examples of the poorly-vetted, 
unqualified, and unfit nominees that President Trump has 
submitted to the Senate. There are many more nominees whose 
issues never became public, or who withdrew rather than answer 
additional questions. Few, if any, of these individuals should 
be placed in a position of public trust with regards to our 
nation's security in this or any administration.
    Notably, however, the President has continued to re-
nominate many of these nominees despite serious objections from 
both Democratic and Republican Senators--only further 
contributing to vacancies in Senate-confirmed officials for 
months on end. In some cases, those who are confirmed but ill-
suited for management contribute to a work environment that has 
driven away talented and dedicated staff, putting the well-
being of the Department's workforce at risk.\165\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \165\ For example, the Senate-confirmed Chief of Protocol, Sean 
Lawler, resigned following serious allegations of misconduct, which 
included yelling, carrying a whip around the office, and bullying 
subordinates. ``Trump's suspended protocol chief would `scream,' use 
profanity, and berate employees, sources say,'' CNN, June 26, 2019; 
Jennifer Jacobs & Daniel Flatley, ``Trump's Protocol Chief Is Quitting 
Just Before the G-20 Summit,'' Bloomberg, June 25, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When the Trump administration fails to vet its nominees 
properly or intentionally ignores red flags, the American 
people pay the price. When individuals with stained records 
project our national image abroad, our country is worse off. 
And when our national security is entrusted to those who--
through incompetence and inexperience--cannot protect it, our 
adversaries benefit.


                               Chapter 3

                    A Culture of Fear and Mistrust: 
                      Attacks on Career Employees

                              ----------                              

        If this administration is going to define disagreement 
        as disloyalty, then it is headed toward a ruinous 
        outcome. It will inevitably lead to the death of 
        expertise . . .

                                    --Ambassador Nancy McEldowney, 
                    Retired Director Foreign Service Institute\166\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \166\ Charles Clark, ``Two Officials, Two Agencies, Two Exits with 
Harsh Words for Trump Team,'' Government Executive, Aug. 1, 2017.


    The Department of State's Foreign Service and Civil Service 
officers take an oath to support and defend the Constitution 
and to ``well and faithfully discharge the duties of the 
office'' that they are entering.\167\ These public servants are 
non-partisan: they execute the policies of both Democratic and 
Republican administrations with equal force and to the best of 
their abilities. It is this core characteristic that ensures 
they serve the mission, and the nation, not any one party or 
president.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \167\ 5 U.S.C. Sec. 3331.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In return, these career public servants are supposed to 
receive ``equal opportunity and fair and equitable treatment in 
employment . . . without regard to race, color, religion, sex, 
national origin, age, disability, political affiliation, 
marital status, or sexual orientation.''\168\ These factors are 
to play no role in personnel decisions, which should be based 
solely on merit.\169\ But in the era of President Trump, who 
has attacked career employees by name, there have been credible 
reports of political targeting and retaliation against career 
State Department employees. State Department documents have 
revealed that, as early as April 2017, senior White House and 
State Department officials had tagged some Department employees 
as ``leaker,'' ``troublemaker,'' and ``turncoat.''\170\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \168\ 3 FAM 1511.1; see also 3 FAM 2211.
    \169\ See 3 FAM 1212.
    \170\ Nahal Toosi, ``Emails Reveal Conservative Alarm Over `Obama 
holdovers' in Trump Administration,'' Politico, March 15, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Although some discriminatory and retaliatory measures have 
occurred by political appointees in lower-level leadership 
positions, a toxic environment can only flourish when it 
reflects the culture set at the top. For example, a year-long 
State Department Inspector General (OIG) investigation found 
that senior political appointees had also accused employees of 
being ``Obama holdovers,'' ``traitors,'' and ``disloyal'' based 
on their perceived political views, and retaliated against 
them.\171\ A subsequent OIG report found that senior political 
appointees in the Secretary's office removed a career expert 
before her posting was complete, in part based on perceptions 
about her political views and ethnic origin.\172\ Additional 
credible and detailed complaints alleged that employees with 
specialized skills and years of expertise were reassigned or 
given mundane tasks, such as reviewing and responding to 
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, in an effort to 
sideline them or cut them out from work on specific 
portfolios.\173\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \171\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices in 
the Bureau of International Organization Affairs, at 11 (Aug. 2019).
    \172\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices 
Involving the Office of the Secretary, at 9 (Nov. 2019).
    \173\ See, e.g., Yeganeh Torbati, ``Exclusive: Senior State Dept. 
refugee official sidelined--sources,'' Reuters, Jan. 9, 2018; Elise 
Labott, ``Exclusive: Frustrated State Department employees hire 
attorneys, charging 'political retribution,' '' CNN, May 28, 2018; U.S. 
Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review of Allegations 
of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices Involving the 
Office of the Secretary (Nov. 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These pernicious practices, compounded with a lack of 
accountability, have had damaging consequences. Employees--many 
of them with years of valuable service and experience--have 
left the Department because they found the work environment too 
hostile. Others have sought refuge in lower-profile jobs where 
they can avoid political fights and the attention of political 
appointees.\174\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \174\ Michael Crowley et al., ``How the State Dept.'s Dissenters 
Incited a Revolt, Then a Rallying Cry,'' The New York Times, Nov. 9, 
2019
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The State Department's Inspector General until May 2020, 
Steven Linick, was an independent and nonpartisan senior career 
official whose mandate was to hold the Department and the 
Secretary accountable for any misconduct.\175\ He oversaw the 
investigations into political retaliation at the Department 
and, ironically, was fired without explanation and under a 
shroud of suspected political retaliation against him for 
investigating wrongdoing at the Department.\176\ Coming amid 
the removals of five other inspectors general in a span of six 
weeks, Linick's firing further demonstrated the Trump 
administration's contempt for, and distrust of, those committed 
to carrying out their responsibilities without regard to 
politics.\177\ In an unusual move, Linick has been replaced by 
Stephen Akard, a Trump administration political appointee, who 
continues to also serve in his role as the head of the Office 
of Foreign Missions.\178\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \175\ The Inspector General is an independent and non-partisan 
investigation arm of the State Department.
    \176\ Michelle Kelemen, ``Ex-State Department Inspector General 
Says He Was Given No Valid Reason When Fired,'' NPR, June 10, 2020.
    \177\ Melissa Quinn, ``The internal watchdogs Trump has fired or 
replaced,'' CBS News, May 19, 2020.
    \178\ Deirdre Shesgreen, `` `Lapdog' or watchdog? The State 
Department's new inspector general under fire for conflicts of 
interest, inexperience,'' USA Today, June 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Administration's Disdain and Distrust
    of Career Public Servants
    President Trump came into office distrustful of career 
professionals at the Department of State, whom he termed ``Deep 
State'' and believed were against him, simply because they had 
worked to execute the policies of the previous 
administration.\179\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \179\ See, e.g., Julie Hirschfield Davis, ``Rumblings of a `Deep 
State' Undermining Trump? It Was Once a Foreign Concept,'' The New York 
Times, Mar. 6, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The idea of ``loyalists'' who needed to be ``purged'' from 
federal government began early in the Trump administration, and 
both of President Trump's Secretaries of State looked the other 
way when career employees alleged that political calculations 
were affecting personnel decisions.\180\ Influential 
Republicans outside the Administration and conservative media 
promoted the narrative that ``holdovers'' must be ``purged'' 
and that the Administration should focus on ousting ``Obama/
Clinton loyalists.''\181\ Trump's ``deep state'' rhetoric and 
attacks on career employees emboldened political appointees 
throughout the Department to follow through.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \180\ For example, the President's allies, including Newt Gingrich, 
former Speaker of the House and spouse to the Ambassador to the Holy 
See, encouraged him to ``purge'' the ``Obama loyalists'' out of the 
Department and reduce the number of ``bureaucrats'' whose only presumed 
goal was to hold up the Trump administration's agenda. See, e.g., Julie 
Hirschfield Davis, ``Rumblings of a `Deep State' Undermining Trump? It 
Was Once a Foreign Concept,'' The New York Times, Mar. 6, 2017. 
(quoting Newt Gingrich, ``What President Trump is discovering is that 
he has a huge, huge problem underneath him, and I think he's shocked 
that the system is as hostile as it is.'').
    \181\ Sean Hannity ``Trump Must Purge Deep-State Bureaucrats Now,'' 
Fox News, Mar. 10, 2017; Nahal Toosi, ``Emails reveal conservative 
alarm over `Obama holdovers' in Trump administration,'' Politico, Mar. 
15, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As retired Ambassador Ronald Neumann noted, the 
politicization of the State Department represents a deliberate 
destruction ``based on the belief that the federal government 
is hostile and now you have to put in loyal people across the 
board in senior positions to control the bastards--the career 
bureaucrats.''\182\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \182\ George Packer, ``The President Is Winning His War on American 
Institutions,'' The Atlantic, Apr. 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The irony, of course, is that, in the words of a former 
Assistant Secretary, ``[i]t's not in [career employees'] DNA'' 
to disclose State Department matters.\183\ Despite what many in 
Congress and the public see as a series of chaotic and unwise 
foreign policy decisions, the Department's career employees 
have continued to fulfill the Department's mission and do their 
jobs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \183\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspector General Finds ``Hostile Treatment''
    and ``Unmerited Accusations of Disloyalty''
    Less than two months after Secretary Pompeo was confirmed, 
it was reported that Mari Stull, a senior advisor in the 
International Organization Affairs (IO) Bureau, was vetting 
career Department employees based on their political 
affiliation and personal views, and compiling a ``loyalty 
list'' of those she believed met her ideological litmus 
test.\184\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \184\ Colum Lynch & Robbie Gramer, ``Trump Appointee Compiles 
Loyalty Lists of U.S. Employees at U.N., State,'' Foreign Policy, June 
13, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to employees, Stull reviewed social media pages 
of career personnel for ``ideological deviations'' from 
President Trump's agenda and researched their work for previous 
administrations.\185\ Those determined untrustworthy were 
sidelined and kept out of high-level meetings, creating a 
``level of chaos and dysfunction'' that some officials had 
never before observed in their long careers.\186\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \185\ Id.
    \186\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Following numerous congressional inquiries, the State 
Department's Office of the Inspector General interviewed more 
than 40 individuals, including current and former senior 
Department officials, such as then-Deputy Secretary John 
Sullivan, then-Acting Director General for the Foreign Service 
William Todd, and then-Under Secretary for Political Affairs 
Thomas Shannon, about the allegations of political retaliation 
in the IO Bureau.\187\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \187\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices in 
the Bureau of International Organization Affairs, at 1 (Aug. 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In August 2019, after a 13-month investigation, the OIG 
concluded there had been ``disrespectful and hostile treatment 
of employees, accusations against and harassment of career 
employees premised on claims that they were `disloyal' based on 
their perceived political views, and retaliation.''\188\ 
According to the OIG's report, ``[n]umerous employees told OIG 
that Assistant Secretary [of the IO bureau, Kevin] Moley and 
Ms. Stull made inappropriate accusations of disloyalty and made 
positive or negative comments about employees based on 
perceived political views.''\189\ Stull, in particular, 
referred to employees as ``Obama holdovers,'' ``traitors,'' 
part of the ``Deep State,'' and ``disloyal.''\190\ Moreover, 
Assistant Secretary Moley and most of the other senior 
officials in the bureau did nothing to address Stull's 
reprehensible behavior, with the OIG finding ``significant 
evidence of systemic deficiencies in leadership and management 
relating to the treatment of career employees.''\191\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \188\ Id. at Highlights.
    \189\ Id. at 8.
    \190\ Id.
    \191\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices in 
the Bureau of International Affairs, at 13, 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The OIG's investigation found a culture of hostility and 
disrespect had permeated the bureau. The Assistant Secretary 
and Stull ``frequently berated employees,'' and engaged in 
unprofessional behavior, especially toward junior staff.\192\ 
Employees reported to senior officials that Moley and Stull 
``cultivated'' a ``negative and `vindictive' 
environment.''\193\ According to one employee, ``working with 
Stull involved `six to eight hostile interactions per 
day.'''\194\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \192\ Id. at 6.
    \193\ Id.
    \194\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Even after Department leadership expressed concerns to 
Assistant Secretary Moley about his conduct and the Department 
Legal Adviser ``counseled'' Stull, their treatment of employees 
did not improve.\195\ The environment Stull and Assistant 
Secretary Moley fostered in the IO Bureau took a toll on 
employees. Between March 2018 and August 2019, approximately 50 
employees--more than 15 percent of the total--left the bureau, 
with many citing its ``poor leadership'' as the reason for 
their exit.\196\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \195\ Id. at 11, 13.
    \196\ Id. at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Career Employee's Removal Linked to Perceived
    National Origin and Political Views
    IO Bureau employees were not the only ones in the 
Department to experience political targeting and retaliation. 
In early 2018, reports emerged that employees in the Secretary 
of State's Office had been subject to retaliation, leading to 
congressional inquiries and, in response, a separate 
investigation by the OIG. In November 2019, the OIG concluded 
that an employee in the Secretary of State's office had been 
improperly pushed out based on her national origin and 
perceptions about her political affiliation.\197\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \197\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices 
Involving the Office of the Secretary, at 10-13 (Nov. 2019). The OIG 
also examined other allegations by four other employees in other 
bureaus, but was unable to conclusively determine whether inappropriate 
action had occurred in two instances, in part because the OIG was 
``unable to obtain essential information from key decisionmakers.'' Id. 
at Highlights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The career State Department employee had started working in 
the Secretary of State's Office in July 2016, on a fixed one-
year detail from her home office. In March 2017, a conservative 
website published an article with a series of false claims 
about her prior work history and affiliations, referring to her 
as an ``Obama aide'' who had ``burrowed'' in the Department and 
was now ``running Tehran policy.''\198\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \198\ Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shortly after the article was published, a White House 
staffer and senior Department political appointees began 
exchanging emails about the employee.\199\ One political 
appointee falsely claimed that the employee had been ``born in 
Iran'' and, citing hearsay, that she had ``cried when the 
president won.''\200\ One appointee forwarded the email chain 
to Brian Hook, then the Director of Policy Planning under 
Secretary Tillerson, who responded that the information was 
``helpful'' and that ``I've emailed friends who tracked the 
Iran deal for intel on her and waiting to hear back.''\201\ 
Another senior official, Edward Lacey, who was Hook's deputy 
and a career official, subsequently wrote to Hook that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \199\ Id. at 5.
    \200\ Id. at 6. As the OIG noted, the employee was in fact born in 
the United States.
    \201\ Id. at 6.


        With few exceptions--notably, me--your immediate 
        predecessors handpicked all of the [Policy Planning] 
        staff--including the career civil servants on detail to 
        us ([the employee] being one of them). Their picks, 
        without exception, were Obama/Clinton loyalists not at 
        all supportive of President Trump's foreign policy 
        agenda. I succeeded in ousting five whose details 
        expired before your arrival.\202\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \202\ Id. at 7.


    Not long after Lacey's email, the employee was pushed out 
of the Secretary's office. The OIG's investigation determined 
that assumptions by administration political appointees--which 
they did not attempt to verify--about the career employee's 
perceived political opinions, prior work for the Obama 
administration (as a career employee), and (incorrect) 
perceptions about her national origin, ``played at least some 
role'' in her early ouster.\203\ The OIG concluded that senior 
political appointees at the Department used those factors to 
cast doubt on her loyalty to the United States and the Trump 
administration's agenda, and that Hook ultimately made the 
decision to end the employee's detail early.\204\ It also found 
that Hook did not respond to concerning allegations by the 
employee that, as a result of the false media coverage, she had 
received threats and feared for her safety.\205\ Hook offered 
differing rationales for the early dismissal, which the OIG did 
not find convincing.\206\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \203\ Id. at 10.
    \204\ Id. at 9-13.
    \205\ Id. at 8.
    \206\ Id. at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The OIG did not establish whether Hook took any actions 
against other career employees. But in April 2017, after a 
meeting with a staff member on the National Security Council, 
Derek Harvey, Hook emailed himself a list of notes about career 
employees, which included notations like ``a leaker and a 
troublemaker'' and a ``turncoat'' next to employee names.\207\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \207\ Id. at 23; Nahal Toosi, ``Emails reveal conservative alarm 
over `Obama holdovers' in Trump administration,'' Politico, Mar. 15, 
2018. Harvey later went to work for Congressman Devin Nunes on the 
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Both Hook and Secretary Pompeo objected to the OIG report's 
conclusions. Hook took the unusual step of writing a rebuttal 
that he insisted be included in the final OIG report.\208\ 
Secretary Pompeo demanded that IG Linick request an 
investigation into whether information in a Daily Beast article 
on the draft report had leaked from Linick's office (the report 
had also been circulated among more than 20 people inside the 
Department for weeks). A subsequent investigation by the 
Department of Defense's Criminal Investigative Service ``found 
no information indicating that any DOS OIG employee provided 
information from the report to The Daily Beast prior to the 
publication of its article.''\209\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \208\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices 
Involving the Office of the Secretary, at 42.
    \209\ U.S. Department of Defense Inspector General, Memorandum of 
Findings, at 2 (Mar. 17, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department Leadership's Lack of Response
    to Political Retaliation
    In the time since the allegations of political retaliation 
became public, the Department has largely ignored them or 
failed to respond.\210\ The Department refused for nearly two 
years to provide documents to congressional committees seeking 
information about allegations of retaliation, and failed to 
take any action against senior officials who engaged in 
retaliation against career employees.\211\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \210\ The Department failed to implement an action plan within 60 
days, as called for in the August 2019 OIG report. Matthew Lee, ``US 
diplomat accused of political retribution steps down,'' AP, Oct. 18, 
2019. In response to the November 2019 OIG report, the Department only 
responded to the OIG's findings regarding one of five employees. 
Although the OIG's findings were inconclusive, that was due in part due 
to evasive answers by political appointees, and in at least one 
instance, the OIG noted that there was ``little information about the 
underlying rationale'' for a distinguished 30-year career employee's 
reassignment. U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, 
Review of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel 
Practices Involving the Office of the Secretary, at 20, 27.
    \211\ The Department agreed to develop a corrective action plan to 
address ``leadership and management deficiencies'' in the IO Bureau, 
but Assistant Secretary Moley retired before the plan was implemented. 
See U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review of 
Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices in 
the Bureau of International Organization Affairs, at 20; Matthew Lee, 
``US diplomat accused of political retribution steps down,'' AP, Oct. 
18, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ambassador Michael McKinley, who served as a senior advisor 
to Secretary Pompeo until October 2019, said that after the 
release of the August OIG report, ``[i]t became apparent . . . 
that the Department would not be taking the key corrective 
actions that many employees had anticipated.''\212\ In an 
internal meeting with Department employees, Under Secretary for 
Political Affairs David Hale and Deputy Secretary John Sullivan 
acknowledged that they could have responded to the retaliation 
allegations earlier.\213\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \212\ Michael McKinley, Deposition before the House Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence, House Committee on Oversight and 
Reform, and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Oct. 16, 2019, at 
21.
    \213\ Colum Lynch & Robbie Gramer, ``State Department Failed to 
Shield its Diplomats from Political Reprisals, Officials Concede,'' 
Foreign Policy, Sept. 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the end, those who engaged in retaliation escaped 
official accountability. Even after the OIG's heavily critical 
August 2019 report, Department leadership took no immediate 
action: Assistant Secretary Moley remained in his leadership 
position without consequences, until he retired in late 
November 2019.\214\ Mari Stull left the Department in December 
2018, without being interviewed by the OIG.\215\ Lacey retired 
before the completion of the investigation into retaliation in 
the Secretary's office.\216\ And Brian Hook kept his job as 
special representative for Iran and senior advisor to the 
Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \214\ Matthew Lee, ``US diplomat accused of political retribution 
steps down,'' AP, Oct. 18, 2019; Colum Lynch & Robbie Gramer, ``State 
Department Failed to Shield its Diplomats from Political Reprisals, 
Officials Concede,'' Foreign Policy, Sept. 3, 2019. Senior Department 
officials claimed that only the President could fire Moley, despite his 
clear violations of Department leadership and management policies.
    \215\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices in 
the Bureau of International Organization Affairs, at 2. Stull is now 
employed at an entity under the umbrella of the Organization of 
American States--an agency not directly part of the U.S. government, 
but that likely required State Department support to obtain the 
position. There are questions about how Stull obtained this employment 
despite the OIG's findings against her from her time at the State 
Department. See Letter from Ranking Member Menendez to Deputy Secretary 
Steve Biegun and Under Secretary for Political Affairs David Hale, Mar. 
27, 2020
    \216\ U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review 
of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices 
Involving the Office of the Secretary, at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In fact, the only person to suffer career consequences 
since the OIG investigations was the Inspector General himself, 
whom President Trump fired at the urging of Secretary 
Pompeo.\217\ The message to the Department's employees is 
clear: wrongdoing by political appointees will not be punished, 
but those who seek to reveal that wrongdoing should watch their 
backs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \217\ Catie Edmondson and Michael D. Shear, ``Trump Ousted State 
Dept. Watchdog at Pompeo's Urging; Democrats Open Inquiry,'' The New 
York Times, May 16, 2020 (updated May 19, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Political Attacks on Nonpartisan Public Servants
    Attacks on State Department public servants gained a 
further unwelcome spotlight during the impeachment inquiry into 
President Trump, in which several career employees testified. 
Career officials, who had served across Democratic and 
Republican administrations alike, suddenly found themselves 
under a frenzy of attacks as conservative media outlets--and 
senior administration officials, including the President--
referred to them as ``radical unelected bureaucrats'' and 
``Never Trumpers.''\218\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \218\ Chandelis Duster, et al., ``Trump lashes out at State 
Department employee ahead of public testimony,'' CNN, Nov. 17, 2019; 
Steve Benen, ``White House blasts Trump-appointed `radical unelected 
bureaucrats,' '' MSNBC, Oct. 23, 2019; John Hudson & Carol Morello, 
``Bill Taylor Spent Years Fighting Corruption in Ukraine. His Last Four 
Months Under Trump were the `Antithesis' of That.,'' The Washington 
Post, Oct. 23, 2019l.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senior Department leadership, including Secretary Pompeo, 
remained silent in the face of these attacks, even as President 
Trump personally attacked some of the Department's most 
distinguished career officials, including Ambassador Marie 
Yovanovitch, Ambassador Bill Taylor, and Deputy Assistant 
Secretary George Kent.\219\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \219\ Jennifer Hansler, ``Pompeo declines to defend diplomats 
attacked by Trump,'' CNN, November 18, 2019; Rebecca Shabad, ``Trump 
lashes out at Yovanovitch on Twitter during hearing,'' CNBC, Nov. 15, 
2019; Lisa Rein, ``Career federal employees are the protagonists in the 
impeachment drama --at risk to themselves,'' The Washington Post, Nov. 
12, 2019; Yaron Steinbuch, ``Trump attacks George Kent and William 
Taylor for testimony, despite `not watching' hearings,'' NY Post, Nov. 
14, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Secretary Pompeo also declined to defend Ambassador 
Yovanovitch when, months earlier, she was the subject of 
several false smears by a conservative columnist and others: 
that she was a disloyal ``Obama holdover,'' working with George 
Soros to harm President Trump's campaign and bolster Hillary 
Clinton in the 2016 election.\220\ The false accusations were 
refuted and dismissed by her colleagues, including then-Deputy 
Secretary Sullivan and Under Secretary David Hale, who went as 
far as to say no one in the Department thought the allegations 
against Ambassador Yovanovitch were credible.\221\ Yet 
Secretary Pompeo never said a public word in support of one of 
his senior-most female ambassadors, who had served the 
Department more than three decades, including in several 
hardship posts.\222\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \220\ Marie ``Masha'' Yovanovitch, Deposition before the House 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House Committee on 
Oversight and Reform, and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs (Joint 
House Committees), Oct. 11, 2019, at 61-64; Catherine Croft, Deposition 
before the Joint House Committees, Oct. 30, 2019, at 14-15; The Trump-
Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report, House Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence (Dec. 2019), at 43-44.
    \221\ David M. Hale, Deposition before the Joint House Committees, 
Nov. 6, 2019, at 25; John Sullivan, Nominee to be Ambassador to Russia, 
Testimony, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, Oct. 30, 2019.
    \222\ Jennifer Hansler, ``Pompeo declines to defend diplomats 
attacked by Trump,'' CNN, November 18, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senior leadership also rebuffed repeated attempts by 
Ambassador Yovanovitch and other Department officials to issue 
a statement defending her against the false claims.\223\ It was 
later revealed that Secretary Pompeo had agreed to receive a 
large file of disinformation from Rudy Giuliani that contained 
additional false smears against Ambassador Yovanovitch and 
other Department employees.\224\ Secretary Pompeo then 
instructed his senior officials to review the disinformation 
packet, which was eventually referred to the OIG.\225\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \223\ McKinley Deposition at 22, Hale Deposition at 26-27, 
Yovanovitch Deposition at 62-64.
    \224\ Kenneth Vogel, ``Giuliani Provides Details of What Trump Knew 
About Ambassador's Removal,'' The New York Times, Dec. 16, 2019.
    \225\ William Cummings et al., ```Mysterious' packet of Ukraine 
disinformation arrives on Capitol Hill amid Trump impeachment 
inquiry,'' USA Today, Oct. 2, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Before impeachment, career employees had already suffered 
three years of mistreatment at the hands of senior leadership 
and political appointees at the Department. Yet, the 
impeachment inquiry demonstrated both a stunning culmination 
and a new low in the Administration's attacks against career 
employees, exacerbating an ``atmosphere of unease and 
mistrust'' at the Department.\226\ The Administration's 
response to the testimony of diplomats in the impeachment 
inquiry displayed its contempt for the very notion of a non-
partisan, career diplomatic service. It also served as a 
warning: the President and his administration would viciously 
attack any career official who reports or testifies about such 
wrongdoing, thereby further undermining the rule of law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \226\ Robbie Gramer et al., ``Fear and Loathing at Pompeo's State 
Department,'' Foreign Policy, Nov. 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
    The attacks on career employees threaten more than just a 
single bureau's effectiveness. They undermine a core tenet of 
public service: non-partisanship. Public servants advance the 
mission of the agency that employs them. They seek to protect 
and secure the interests of the American people, and above all, 
they serve to uphold the Constitution. Politically-motivated 
attacks on career public servants do not advance the security 
of the United States or the American people; they only threaten 
to further divide and erode confidence in the critical work 
carried out by the Department and its employees. Those that do 
not stand up and defend the non-partisan public service do a 
great disservice to the country.
    Career public servants should never be subjected to 
inappropriate political targeting or reassignment. Secretary 
Pompeo's so-called ``ethos'' statement, which hangs in the 
lobby of the State Department, includes principles such as 
serving with ``unfailing professionalism,'' acting with 
``uncompromising personal and professional integrity,'' taking 
``ownership of and responsibility for my actions and 
decisions'' and showing ``unstinting respect in word and deed 
for my colleagues.''\227\ Yet, time and again, the President, 
Secretary Pompeo, and the senior political leadership of the 
Department have acted with contempt toward the Department's 
career employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \227\ U.S. Department of State, ``Professional Ethos,'' https://
www.state.gov/about/professional-ethos (last visited July 15, 2020).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Chapter 4


                           A Crisis of Morale

                              ----------                              

        [The] prevailing mood is low and getting lower, if it 
        can.

                                             --Thomas R. Pickering,
                   seven-time U.S. ambassador, including to Russia 
            and the UN, under six presidents from both parties\228\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \228\ Karen DeYoung et al., ``Demoralized State Department 
personnel question Pompeo's role in Ukraine crisis,'' The Washington 
Post, Oct. 7, 2019.


    The previous chapters have illustrated how extended 
vacancies, an exodus of expertise, an influx of unqualified 
nominees, and unaddressed reports of retaliation against career 
employees have damaged the State Department. It should 
therefore come as no surprise that morale and confidence in the 
Department's leadership has dropped precipitously since the 
Trump administration took office in 2017. Employees and former 
officials have reported that the Administration's ``stinging 
disrespect'' for the Department's diplomatic work has driven 
away experienced and talented staff, and that morale is 
``plunging . . . to its lowest level in decades.''\229\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \229\ Dan De Luce & Robbie Gramer, ``U.S. Diplomat's Resignation 
Signals Wider Exodus from State Department: One diplomat's stinging 
resignation letter offers a glimpse into declining morale at the State 
Department under Trump,'' Foreign Policy, Dec. 9, 2017; William J. 
Burns, ``The Lost Art of American Diplomacy,'' Foreign Affairs, May/
June 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To quantify the effect of these developments on morale, 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democratic staff reviewed 
data from employee surveys collected annually by the federal 
government. Responses to the annual Employee Viewpoint Survey 
(EVS) are intended to measure ``employees' perceptions of 
whether, and to what extent, conditions characteristic of 
successful organizations are present in their agencies.''\230\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \230\ Office of Personnel Management, ``About,'' https://
www.opm.gov/fevs/about/ (last visited June 25, 2020). EVS surveys are 
meant, among other purposes, to serve as a tool to provide agency heads 
insight into where improvements are needed. The Survey includes 
responses from employees from May to July 2019. U.S. Department of 
State, Resources--Bureau of Global Talent Management (Federal Viewpoint 
Surveys), https://www.state.gov/resources-bureau-of-global-talent-
management/ (last visited June 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The results reveal a steady and significant deterioration 
of morale, effectiveness, and leadership over the past three 
years--with particularly precipitous declines in several 
offices and bureaus. Throughout the Department, there are 
serious concerns that coercive partisanship and prohibited 
personnel practices have run amok, coupled with a starkly 
declining confidence in senior leadership, doubts about the 
effectiveness of Department operations, and a growing urge to 
leave the Department.
    This chapter presents some of the most concerning trends 
reported by the Department's employees--results that are not 
evident in the aggregated Department-wide data that the State 
Department has released--which provide critical and troubling 
insights into the consequences of corrosive and negligent 
leadership on our diplomatic corps.\231\ It also examines the 
effect of the Trump administration's response to the renewed 
focus on racial injustice and systemic racism, which has 
further exacerbated already-low morale from the Department's 
ongoing struggle to maintain a diverse, representative 
workforce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \231\ All survey data presented in this chapter is derived from 
``Negative'' percentages presented in 1st Level Subagency Reports 
compiled from responses to the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (EVS) 
for the years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. The EVS is administered to 
full-time and part-time, permanent, non-seasonal employees. All 
reported percentages in this chapter refer to the percentage of 
employees who responded to the survey, which OPM determined was 
sufficient to constitute a representative sample. For more information 
about the EVS methodology, see the ``OPM FEVS Technical Report.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Legal Adviser (L)
    The Office of the Legal Adviser (L) provides advice on all 
legal issues, whether domestic or international, facing the 
Department. Among their responsibilities, L attorneys help 
ensure that State Department employees follow the ethics 
regulations and legal guidelines that give our diplomats 
authority and credibility when representing America.\232\ 
Recent data indicates that increasing numbers of the State 
Department's own lawyers believe they cannot disclose suspected 
violations of laws, rules, and regulations, or are subject to 
arbitrary action and coercion. This disturbing trend 
jeopardizes adherence to the rule of law for our foreign policy 
and national security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \232\ U.S. Department of State, ``Office of the Legal Adviser,'' 
https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/bureaus-and-offices-reporting-
directly-to-the-secretary/office-of-the-legal-adviser/ (last visited 
June 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Employees responding to the survey reported startling 
trends from 2016 to 2019, including:


   Rising fear of reprisal:

     A seven-fold increase in the percentage of 
            respondents who felt they could not disclose a 
            suspected violation of law, rule, or regulation 
            without fear of reprisal, from less than 1 percent 
            in 2016 to more than 7 percent in 2019.


   Increased reports of political coercion:

     A 22 point increase among respondents who 
            reported that arbitrary action, personal 
            favoritism, and coercion for partisan political 
            purposes was tolerated in their bureau, rising from 
            1 percent in 2016 to 23 percent in 2019.


   Declining confidence in senior leadership:

     A 34 point increase among those reporting that 
            the Department's senior leaders did not maintain 
            high levels of honesty and integrity, rising from 0 
            percent in 2016 to 34 percent in 2019.


   Rising dissatisfaction:

     A more than doubling in the percentage of 
            respondents reporting that they were considering 
            leaving their job in the next year, rising from 13 
            percent in 2016 to 30 percent in 2019.


Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM)
    The Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) is 
responsible for protecting and assisting refugees and 
vulnerable migrants around the world. It oversees the 
Department's humanitarian assistance efforts, manages refugee 
admissions to the U.S., and partners with international and 
non-profit organizations to carry out these goals. An increased 
number of PRM staff reported that arbitrary action and personal 
favoritism was tolerated, and that the Bureau could not recruit 
people with the right skills to carry out its mission. These 
concerns are telling for a Bureau whose mission has been 
severely curtailed by the Trump administration, which has 
sought to dramatically reduce refugee admissions, and where at 
least one senior official responsible for that program was 
sidelined.
    Employees responding to the survey from PRM Bureau reported 
concerning trends from 2016 to 2019, including:


   Rising fears of arbitrary action and coercion:

     A more than doubling in the percent of 
            respondents reporting that arbitrary action, 
            personal favoritism, and coercion for partisan 
            political purposes was tolerated, rising from 19 
            percent in 2016 to 42 percent in 2019.


   Recruitment concerns:

     A 23 point increase in the percentage of 
            respondents reporting that their work unit could 
            not recruit people with the right skills, rising 
            from 27 percent in 2016 to 50 percent in 2019.


   Declining confidence in senior leadership:

     An almost ten-fold increase in the percentage 
            of respondents reporting that senior leaders did 
            not maintain high standards of honesty and 
            integrity, rising from 3 percent in 2016 to 29 
            percent in 2019.

Bureau of Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism (CT)
    The Bureau of Counterterrorism and Countering Violent 
Extremism (CT) employees leads State Department efforts to 
counter and defeat terrorism around the world, especially 
through cooperation with our partners and allies.\233\ CT 
employees reported increased concerns about recruitment and 
lacking sufficient resources, which could hamper our efforts 
against terrorism, affecting Americans both at home and abroad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \233\ U.S. Department of State, ``Bureau of Counterterrorism,'' 
https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-
security-democracy-and-human-rights/bureau-of-counterterrorism/ (last 
visited June 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Employees in the CT Bureau reported the following:


   Less effective operations:

     A doubling in the percentage of respondents 
            reporting that their work unit is unable to recruit 
            people with the right skills, increasing from 18 
            percent in 2016 to 36 percent in 2019.


   Declining confidence in senior leadership:

     A nearly two-fold increase in the percentage 
            of respondents who reported that their senior 
            leaders did not generate high levels of motivation 
            and commitment, increasing from 28 percent in 2016 
            to 55 percent in 2019.
Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR)
    The Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) is a member 
of the Intelligence Community and is responsible for harnessing 
the nation's intelligence resources to inform U.S. policy 
makers at the State Department.\234\ If INR cannot hire the 
people with the right skills, senior State Department officials 
may be operating without the full intelligence picture, leaving 
them at a disadvantage in interactions with U.S. adversaries 
and others around the world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \234\ U.S. Department of State, ``Bureau of Intelligence and 
Research,'' https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/bureaus-and-offices-
reporting-directly-to-the-secretary/bureau-of-intelligence-and-
research/ (last visited June 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Among employees responding in the INR Bureau:


   Less effective operations:

     A nearly three-fold increase in the percentage 
            of respondents reporting that their work unit was 
            not able to recruit people with the right skill 
            set, increasing from 12 percent in 2016 to 33 
            percent in 2019.


   Declining confidence in senior leadership:

     An eight-fold increase in the percentage of 
            respondents reporting that the Department's senior 
            leadership did not maintain high standards of 
            honesty and integrity, rising from 3 percent in 
            2016 to 24 percent in 2019.
Bureau of International Organization Affairs (IO)
    IO staff are responsible for implementing U.S. policy at 
the United Nations and other multilateral organizations.\235\ 
When other countries share the burden, U.S. policy is made more 
effective and can be implemented at lower cost. Yet if IO staff 
are subject to arbitrary action, personal favoritism, and 
partisan coercion, that weakens our ability to cooperate and 
coordinate with partners and allies, making it harder to 
succeed in executing U.S. policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \235\ U.S. Department of State, ``Bureau of International 
Organizations,'' https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-
for-political-affairs/bureau-of-international-organization-affairs/ 
(last visited June 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Respondents reported the following for the IO Bureau:


   Rising fears of reprisal and partisanship:

     A more than doubling in the percentage of 
            respondents reporting that arbitrary action and 
            coercion for partisan political purposes were 
            tolerated, from 24 percent in 2016 to 53 percent in 
            2019.


   Less effective operations:

     A nearly tripling in the percentage of 
            respondents reporting that their agency was 
            unsuccessful at accomplishing its mission, 
            increasing from 8 percent in 2016 to 23 percent in 
            2019.


   Declining confidence in senior leadership:

     A nearly tripling in the percentage of 
            respondents reporting that senior leaders at the 
            State Department did not maintain high standards of 
            honesty and integrity, increasing from 12 percent 
            in 2016 to 35 percent in 2019.

A Silent Morale Crisis: Diversity
    Already-low morale has been exacerbated by the Trump 
administration's response to the renewed focus on racial 
injustice and systemic racism. Even before the death of George 
Floyd in May 2020, State Department employees reported rising 
concerns about leadership's handling of diversity issues. The 
employee survey responses show a 16 point increase from 2016 to 
2019 in the percentage of employees reporting policies and 
programs did not promote diversity in the workplace in the 
Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration. In the Bureau of 
Intelligence and Research, the percentage of respondents who 
felt their supervisor was not committed to a workforce 
representative of all segments of society increased from nearly 
0 percent in 2016 to 10 percent in 2019. In the Bureau of 
International Organization Affairs, the percentage of 
respondents who felt their supervisor didn't work well with 
employees from different backgrounds doubled from 10 percent in 
2016 to almost 21 percent in 2019.
    While the overall proportion of racial and ethnic 
minorities at State increased from 2002 to 2018, driven mainly 
by increases in the diversity of the Foreign Service, the 
number of African Americans and women at the State Department 
decreased to lower than pre-2002 levels, even as the State 
Department workforce grew.\236\ Out of 189 ambassadors 
currently serving overseas, only four are Hispanic, and just 
three are African American career diplomats.\237\ Hispanic 
employees and women are underrepresented at the Department, 
representing 7 percent and 43 percent of the State Department 
workforce respectively.\238\ In senior leadership, the numbers 
paint an even more disturbing picture: in 2018, white employees 
represented 87 percent of Executive leadership, with a three 
percent decrease in African American leadership from 2002. 
Racial or ethnic minorities in the civil service were 4 percent 
to 29 percent less likely to be promoted than their white 
counterparts, even with similar education, occupation, or years 
in federal service.\239\ For the Foreign Service, in 2019, a 
majority of promotions went to white men: 5 percent went to 
African Americans, 7 percent to Hispanics and Asians, 6 percent 
to other ethnic minorities, and 36 percent went to women.\240\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \236\ Government Accountability Office, State Department: 
Additional Steps Are Needed to Identify Potential Barriers to 
Diversity, at 16, 20, 23 (Jan. 2020).
    \237\ American Academy of Diplomacy Statement, ``Rebuilding After 
the Violence: State Must Improve on Diversity,'' June 9, 2020.
    \238\ Lara Jakes, ``A Reckoning with Race to Ensure Diversity for 
America's Face Abroad,'' The New York Times, June 27, 2020; Hispanic 
people account for 18.5 percent of the population and women account for 
50.8 percent of the population. Government Accountability Office, State 
Department: Additional Steps Are Needed to Identify Potential Barriers 
to Diversity, at 18, 25 (Jan. 2020).
    \239\ Government Accountability Office, State Department: 
Additional Steps Are Needed to Identify Potential Barriers to 
Diversity, at 38, Figure 7, 22, Figure 4, 91, Figure 14 (Jan. 2020).
    \240\ Lara Jakes, ``A Reckoning with Race to Ensure Diversity for 
America's Face Abroad,'' The New York Times, June 27, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like other federal agencies, the State Department also 
faces a sexual harassment and gender discrimination 
problem.\241\ In addition to the number of gender 
discrimination claims filed at the Department spiking in 2018, 
underreporting and a fear of career derailment for coming 
forward with harassment and discrimination allegations continue 
to plague the Department.\242\ The intersection of race and 
gender are acute at the Department, where black women employees 
decreased from 13 percent in 2002 to 9 percent in 2018 and are 
at the highest risk of experiencing sexual harassment.\243\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \241\ Emily Tamkin & Robbie Gramer, ``Will State Miss its #MeToo 
Moment?,'' Foreign Policy, Mar. 5, 2018; U.S. Commission on Civil 
Rights, Federal #MeToo: Examining Sexual Harassment in Government 
Workplaces (Apr. 2020).
    \242\ Id.
    \243\ Office of Civil Rights, No Fear Act For 1st Quarter 2020, 
Feb. 7, 2020. The number of complaints pertaining to discrimination 
based on color, national origin, age, disability, and religion also 
increased from 2015 to the end of 2019. Government Accountability 
Office, State Department: Additional Steps Are Needed to Identify 
Potential Barriers to Diversity, at 26 (Jan. 2020); U.S. Commission on 
Civil Rights, Federal #MeToo: Examining Sexual Harassment in Government 
Workplaces, at 70, 235 (Apr. 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Politically-motivated retaliation and reprisal remain a 
concern, especially among diplomats from historically 
underrepresented backgrounds. In at least once instance, an 
Indian American diplomat before she resigned was told that she 
and an African American colleague were blocked from senior 
leadership assignments because they did not pass the 
``Breitbart test,'' and were not deemed to be sufficiently 
politically loyal toward President Trump.\244\ In a further 
sign of the fear-based climate at a Department reeling from 
Secretary Pompeo's refusal to back Department employees 
testifying in the impeachment inquiry, current officials who 
described to the press their frustration and concern on issues 
of race and diversity in the diplomatic corps only spoke on the 
condition of anonymity, for fear of retaliation or endangering 
their careers.\245\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \244\ Lara Jakes, ``A Reckoning with Race to Ensure Diversity for 
America's Face Abroad,'' The New York Times, June 27, 2020.
    \245\ Lara Jakes & Edward Wong, ``U.S. Diplomats Struggle to Defend 
Democracy Abroad Amid Crises at Home,'' The New York Times, June 8, 
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As non-white, non-male diplomats face their own 
professional struggles in attempting to advance their careers 
at the Department, they also bear the additional burden of 
espousing American ideals to other nations as America and the 
State Department struggle to confront injustice at home. Beyond 
the challenges of experiencing harassment from foreign 
citizens, foreign government officials, and, at times, even 
other U.S. government officials based on their skin color, 
gender, and qualities other than the content of their 
character, diplomats of color have also expressed a lack of 
support from their supervisors and Department leadership.\246\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \246\ See, e.g., Ambassador Charles Ray, ``How U.S. Border Agents 
Mistreat Black American Diplomats,'' Washington International 
Diplomatic Academy, June 7, 2020; Tianna Spears, ``What do I Want From 
White People? (An Illustration on Being Black in America),'' May 30, 
2020, https://whatsupwithtianna.com/2020/05/30/what-do-i-want-from-
white-people-an-illustration-on-being-black-in-america/; Robbie Gramer, 
``Fighting for U.S. Values Abroad, Black Diplomats Struggle with 
Challenges at Home,'' Foreign Policy, June 11, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While diversity issues at the Department long predate the 
Trump administration, they are exacerbated by the 
Administration's continued inflammatory and xenophobic response 
to racial and ethnic issues.\247\ In the first five months of 
the Trump administration, the Department's three most senior 
African American career officials and the top ranking Hispanic 
official were removed or resigned abruptly from their 
positions.\248\ Given President Trump's racially insensitive 
comments labeling African nations and Haiti as ``shithole'' 
countries, moral equivocations after a white supremacist 
murdered an anti-racist protester in Charlottesville, and 
continued disparagement of Mexicans, Muslims, and other diverse 
groups of Americans, it comes as no surprise that he stands out 
from his four predecessors in his failure to nominate more than 
one African American female ambassador.\249\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \247\ Uzra Zeya, ``Trump is Making American Diplomacy White 
Again,'' Politico, Sept. 17, 2018; Robbie Gramer, ``As State Department 
Withers, So Does Diversity in Top Ranks,'' Foreign Policy, Oct. 25, 
2017.
    \248\ Robbie Gramer, ``As State Department Withers, So Does 
Diversity in Top Ranks,'' Foreign Policy, Oct. 25, 2017.
    \249\ Uzra Zeya, ``Trump is Making American Diplomacy White 
Again,'' Politico, Sept. 17, 2018; According to Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee Staff analysis, out of the 87 Ambassadors appointed 
by President Trump from Sept. 2018 to Feb. 2020, a single African 
American female ambassador to Uganda was nominated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Most recently, some African American diplomats have become 
so dejected by the Administration's belittling response to 
worldwide protests against racial injustice triggered by a 
spate of police killings of African Americans, including 
Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, that they are considering 
quitting the Foreign Service.\250\ One African American 
official said, ``I think that a lot of foreign service officers 
of color, particularly black officers, are at a point where 
they're just fed up. . . . We're dissatisfied, we feel 
dehumanized, and I think enough is enough . . . .there is an 
issue of diversity, recruitment, and retention that they've not 
taken seriously.''\251\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \250\ Robbie Gramer, ``Fighting for U.S. Values Abroad, Black 
Diplomats Struggle with Challenges at Home,'' Foreign Policy, June 11, 
2020.
    \251\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For more than two weeks after the outbreak of protests, 
diplomats looked to their leader, the top diplomat of the 
United States, Secretary Pompeo both for guidance on how to 
address the protests to their foreign counterparts and 
reassurance about the Department's efforts to address racial 
injustice.\252\ In the wake of Secretary Pompeo's stunning 
silence, lower-level leadership, including Deputy Secretary 
Biegun, sent messages to the Department's employees, causing 
frustration about Pompeo's delegation of such a highly-
sensitive issue to lower-level leadership.\253\ Other diplomats 
felt abandoned as they faced questions from their counterparts 
around the world and waited for a statement addressing racial 
inequality in the U.S. and the Department from their 
leader.\254\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \252\ Abigail Tracy, ``With America Engulfed in Crisis, Diplomats 
Abroad are Left at a Loss,'' Vanity Fair, June 3, 2020; Conor Finnegan, 
``US Diplomats struggle to navigate racial protests, Trump's messages, 
charges of hypocrisy,'' ABC News, June 2, 2020,.
    \253\ Nahal Toosi, ``U.S. diplomats ask `Where's Pompeo?' on Floyd 
death,'' Politico, June 6, 2020.
    \254\ Kylie Atwood & Jennifer Hansler, ``Pompeo's `deafening' 
silence angers diplomats as protests over racial injustice spread 
globally,'' CNN, June 9, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In comparison, several army leaders issued videos and 
statements to their military branches, addressing Mr. Floyd's 
death, diversity, and racism; reinforcing American values; and 
expressing solidarity with affected staff.\255\ Sixteen days 
after Floyd's death, Secretary Pompeo sent a Department-wide 
email emphasizing the need to combat ``propaganda'' from 
autocratic societies about human rights in America, in a move 
fiercely criticized by many Department employees as ``too 
little, too late,'' embarrassing, disappointing, and ``out of 
touch'' from the reality Department employees were facing.\256\ 
A week later, the Department's only African American Assistant 
Secretary of State and a Trump appointee, Mary Elizabeth 
Taylor, resigned based on the Trump administration's response 
to racial injustice and the protests.\257\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \255\ Nancy A. Youssef, ``Military Leaders Send Missives to Troops: 
`Stay True' to the American People,'' The Wall Street Journal, June 4, 
2020.
    \256\ Robbie Gramer, ``Fighting for U.S. Values Abroad, Black 
Diplomats Struggle with Challenges at Home,'' Foreign Policy, June 11, 
2020.
    \257\ Seung Min Kim, ``Top State Department Official Resigns in 
Protest of Trump's Response to Racial Tensions in the Country,'' The 
Washington Post, June 18, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In a familiar scenario that has played out time and again 
during the Trump administration, Secretary Pompeo's deafening 
silence and failure to stand up for Department employees and 
issue statements of unequivocal support to and for his 
employees has baffled and disappointed Department 
employees.\258\ Secretary Pompeo's leadership vacuum left 
diplomats freewheeling, issuing their own statements addressing 
racial injustice and reassuring colleagues, offering 
unintentionally disjointed messages to their foreign 
counterparts, questioning the Department's true commitment to 
diversity, and struggling to maintain America's credibility in 
the world.\259\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \258\ Kylie Atwood & Jennifer Hansler, ``Pompeo's `deafening' 
silence angers diplomats as protests over racial injustice spread 
globally,'' CNN, June 9, 2020.
    \259\ Lara Jakes & Edward Wong, ``U.S. Diplomats Struggle to Defend 
Abroad Amid Crises at Home,'' The New York Times, June 6, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The frustration of career diplomats with senior leadership 
and the lack of diversity, equity, and inclusion at the 
Department, exacerbated by President Trump and his nominees, is 
ongoing. As recently as July 2020, reports surfaced of 
``cringeworthy'' racist and sexist comments that U.S. 
Ambassador to the United Kingdom Robert ``Woody'' Johnson made 
to London embassy staff.\260\ Ambassador Johnson reportedly 
made disparaging comments about minorities and women on a 
``weekly, if not daily,'' basis, that diplomats found ``deeply 
offensive'' and ``demoralizing.''\261\ Additionally, Ambassador 
Johnson would hold official meetings and events at a men-only 
venue, excluding women, before another diplomat warned him to 
stop.\262\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \260\ Jennifer Hansler et al., ``NFL Owner and Trump Ambassador to 
UK Sparks Watchdog Inquiry over Allegations of Racist and Sexist 
Remarks and Push to Promote Trump Business,'' CNN, July 22, 2020.
    \261\ Matthew Lee & Danica Kirka, ``Allegations Against Trump Envoy 
Roil US Embassy in London, Associated Press, July 23, 2020; Jennifer 
Hansler et al., ``NFL Owner and Trump Ambassador to UK Sparks Watchdog 
Inquiry over Allegations of Racist and Sexist Remarks and Push to 
Promote Trump Business,'' CNN, July 22, 2020.
    \262\ Jennifer Hansler et al., ``NFL Owner and Trump Ambassador to 
UK Sparks Watchdog Inquiry over Allegations of Racist and Sexist 
Remarks and Push to Promote Trump Business,'' CNN, July 22, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In stark contrast to the Department leadership's silence in 
the face of false smear campaigns and unmerited attacks against 
career employees, the Department offered a full-throated 
defense of Ambassador Johnson, stating ``We stand by Ambassador 
Johnson and look forward to him continuing to ensure our 
special relationship with the UK is strong.''\263\ The 
Department's quick defense of Ambassador Johnson is emblematic 
of the Department's willingness to protect President Trump's 
allies, even at the expense of career employees who may be 
facing toxic leadership and hostile work environments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \263\ Matthew Lee & Danica Kirka, ``Allegations Against Trump Envoy 
Roil US Embassy in London,'' Associated Press, July 23, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measurable Damage to Integrity, Leadership,
    and Workplace Culture
    The responses and views by employees shown in the EVS 
surveys provide valuable, yet disturbing insights. They show 
the pernicious effect of a culture in which ``loyalists'' are 
rewarded and career public servants are viewed with suspicion 
and sidelined.\264\ They demonstrate that a sense of inclusion 
and belonging as an American diplomat is frayed. They give 
credence to the increased workload and burnout resulting from 
staff attrition and lack of faith in leadership. And they 
indicate that far too many employees are working in a culture 
of fear and survival, not support and professional development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \264\ See also Chapter 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While resignation letters and EVS survey responses offer 
hints as to the reasons the Department is hemorrhaging talent 
it has spent years investing in, the State Department's annual 
score in the Partnership for Public Service's Best Place to 
Work Agency Ranking offers another clue.\265\ The mass exodus 
of senior and mid-level leadership, and a drop in interest of 
joining the Foreign Service coincides with a large drop in the 
Department's ranking of workplace culture and sinking morale 
levels. After consistently ranking as one of the top five large 
federal government agencies to work at since 2012, the State 
Department fell from a ranking of 4 in 2016 to 8 in 2017 after 
the Trump presidential transition.\266\ After a year of Trump 
administration leadership, the Department's ranking dropped 
even more in 2018, from 8 to 14.\267\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \265\ See, e.g., Dan De Luce & Robbie Gramer, ``U.S. Diplomat's 
Resignation Signals Wider Exodus From State Department,'' Foreign 
Policy, Dec. 9, 2017; Partnership for Public Service, ``Agency Report: 
Department of State.'' These rankings are based on three questions for 
the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's Federal Employee Viewpoint 
Survey, administered annually: I recommend my organization as a good 
place to work. (Q. 40); Considering everything, how satisfied are you 
with your job? (Q. 69); Considering everything, how satisfied are you 
with your organization? (Q. 71).
    \266\ Partnership for Public Service, Frequently Asked Questions, 
``Download Historical Rankings.''
    \267\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The results of these surveys should be a concern for all 
Americans. If public servants who carry out our national 
security and foreign policy are working in fear, feel 
demoralized, and feel unable to report violations of law, our 
safety and security is endangered. When Department leadership 
is silent and deferential to a President who puts personal gain 
above national security and at every turn undermines the 
ability of our diplomats to represent the United States, the 
basic functions of diplomacy and our foreign policy are 
compromised.
    Many of these concerning trends started under Secretary 
Tillerson, but have worsened under Secretary Pompeo, despite 
Secretary Pompeo's commitment to bring ``swagger'' back to the 
Department. Moreover, as the data reflects responses thorough 
July 2019, it does not reflect the further reported drops in 
morale during the House impeachment inquiry due to attacks on 
career employees, made worse by the Department's failure to 
defend them.
    Rising fears of retaliation and partisanship, less 
effective operations, declining confidence in senior 
leadership, and rising dissatisfaction throughout the State 
Department have resulted in ``an exodus of senior staffers with 
decades of experience'' that is ``taking a startling and 
measurable toll on American foreign relations.''\268\ A 
weakened State Department means a weakened America in the 
global arena. The results of these surveys show that the 
current trajectory is a demoralized Department that feels less 
supported, less secure, and, therefore, less able to fulfill 
its mission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \268\ Reid Wilson, ``Diplomats Describe All-time Low in Morale at 
State under Trump,'' The Hill, Oct. 21, 2019.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Chapter 5


                    Conclusion and Recommendations: 
                          The Challenges Ahead

                              ----------                              

    The Trump administration's disdain for diplomacy and 
neglect of the State Department have created unprecedented 
challenges for U.S. diplomats and the Department's public 
servants. Senior positions have remained vacant. Career 
employees have been attacked and their work devalued by the 
Department's leadership. Inappropriate politicization of the 
Department and its resources continues to fester. Experienced 
civil servants and Foreign Service Officers have been driven 
from serving their nation, leaving gaping holes in our nation's 
diplomatic and national security capabilities.
    Even in the best of times, the work facing the nation's 
diplomatic corps is formidable. Today, the State Department is 
on the front lines battling a global pandemic, while their own 
country's response is failing. Diplomats are promoting human 
rights and justice abroad, while our own country's shortcomings 
in our ongoing struggle with systemic racism are painfully 
evident. They seek to negotiate peace in Afghanistan, Iraq and 
Syria, while the White House actively dismisses intelligence 
critical for safeguarding American lives. The Department is 
implementing policy for a new era of strategic competition with 
Russia and China, while President Trump willingly undermines 
U.S. national security in favor of his own personal and 
political interests. Maintaining their integrity as diplomats 
when U.S. credibility on the global stage is waning and the 
President undermines them with a simple tweet is a daunting 
task.
    While some of the challenges identified in this report are 
not new--the State Department has long faced systemic 
institutional challenges--the Trump administration, by design 
or inattention, has pushed the Department to the brink of 
failure and collapse. It is in this crisis, however, that we 
also have an opportunity to change course and reexamine the 
Department's structure and norms as the country approaches the 
next election.
    Current and future White House and Departmental leadership 
will need to address these challenges with genuine and 
sustained effort. If the current trajectory continues, we will 
be at risk of losing the Department of State as a functioning 
tool for our national security and foreign policy. While some 
may applaud this as ``draining the swamp,'' there can be no 
question that Americans will pay a price for such a loss in our 
security, safety, and prosperity. The nation needs to decide 
what kind of State Department it wants: one that carries out 
foreign policy based on the expertise and experience of those 
who serve our country, or one that caters to the personal, 
political, and financial interests of a President or Secretary 
of State--to the detriment of U.S. national security.
    Congress, as our Article I branch of government, has a 
vital role in changing the current trajectory. Congress must 
craft and pass comprehensive legislation to revitalize the 
Department of State, strengthen protections for our diplomats, 
and rebuild a battered workforce. Such legislation must also 
enhance transparency and accountability at the State 
Department.
    A strong, principled, and ethically sound State Department 
leadership, devoted first and foremost to the Department's 
mission, is also critical in shouldering this burden. All 
Department leadership must protect career personnel from the 
political whims of any White House and at every moment defend 
against the weaponization of the Department and its resources 
for political means. Leadership must address mismanagement and 
misconduct at the Department swiftly, and hold political 
appointees to the same high standards expected of career 
employees.
    Changing the current trajectory will also require a more 
engaged civil society, and, in particular, an active and vocal 
cadre of former Department and national security officials. If 
the past few years have shown anything, it is that the burden 
on career public servants is too heavy; they alone cannot 
ensure that our government adheres to the rule of law and 
upholds national security while also advocating for their own 
wellbeing and careers.
    Below are guiding principles to ensure our diplomatic 
professionals receive the treatment they deserve.
Building a 21st-Century Diplomatic Corps
 1. Rebuild and Retain Expertise in the State Department's 
        Ranks. Given the deep damage to the top ranks of our 
        nation's diplomats the past three years, a top priority 
        must be rebuilding the diplomatic corps, including 
        enhanced recruitment and retention efforts. Senior 
        posts must be filled by those with commensurate 
        experience and expertise, and promotions must represent 
        the diversity in skills and experience of diplomatic 
        professionals to ensure talented personnel do not leave 
        the Department. The current toxic work environment 
        stemming from mismanagement and President Trump's 
        attacks must be addressed by senior leadership to keep 
        employees from leaving, especially individuals who 
        bring unique expertise and diverse perspectives to the 
        Department.


 2. Reduce Barriers to Restoring Lost Expertise and for Former 
        Diplomats and Civil Servants to Return to the 
        Department. Over the last three and a half years, the 
        Department has lost significant institutional and 
        diplomatic expertise, both in the foreign and civil 
        services. While fresh perspectives and young talent are 
        a welcome addition, we must find more ways to enable 
        those who have hard-earned national security expertise 
        to rejoin the Department and continue their service. 
        The Department and Congress should consider the merits 
        of increasing avenues to enhance mid-career hiring 
        authorities and ways to move laterally within the 
        federal government between other foreign policy 
        agencies and similar positions with similar skillsets.


 3. Promote More Career Employees to Senior Positions. Those 
        serving in senior leadership positions are increasingly 
        less representative of the career Foreign Service 
        Officer and Civil Service workforce. In 1975, more than 
        60 percent of positions at the Assistant Secretary 
        level and above were held by career Foreign Service 
        Officers.\269\ By 2014, only 30 percent were held by 
        career Foreign Service Officers.\270\ As of April 2020, 
        career officials at the Department hold only eight 
        percent of leadership positions at the Assistant 
        Secretary level and above.\270\ According to the 
        American Academy of Diplomacy, declining representation 
        of the Foreign Service in senior leadership of the 
        Department results in a loss of long-term field 
        perspective, a loss of Washington experience, and a 
        failure to motivate long-term State employees.\272\ For 
        those in the Civil Service, the problem is even more 
        acute as the large number of senior leadership 
        positions held mostly by political appointees and a few 
        Foreign Service Officers effectively creates a 
        promotion cap for Civil Service employees.\273\ 
        Department leadership should consider expedited 
        promotions for qualified career personnel into senior 
        leadership positions. In addition to leading to better-
        informed policy, maintaining a robust cadre of career 
        diplomatic professionals in senior leadership positions 
        reduces overall politicization of the Department and 
        will encourage career professionals to remain at the 
        Department if they know their hard-earned expertise is 
        valued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \269\ American Academy of Diplomacy, American Diplomacy at Risk, at 
15 (Apr. 2015).
    \270\ Id.
    \271\ George Packer, ``The President is Winning His War on American 
Institutions,'' The Atlantic, Apr. 2020.
    \272\ American Academy of Diplomacy, American Diplomacy at Risk, at 
15-16 (Apr. 2015).
    \273\ American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening the Department 
of State, at 35 (May 2019).


 4. Increase Diversity at Senior Ranks and Throughout the 
        Department. Diversity, equity, and inclusion at the 
        Department is lacking, and traditionally 
        underrepresented employees at the Department face a 
        difficult and different set of challenges and barriers 
        in their careers. The Department must heed the 
        Government Accountability Office's recommendation to 
        identify and address potential barriers to equal 
        opportunity in the diplomatic workforce, and should 
        also take measurable steps to increase diversity in the 
        senior ranks of the Department. Furthermore, the 
        Department should examine ways to increase transparency 
        in the assignments process to ensure an objective set 
        of criteria and metrics are the primary basis for 
        assignment and that implicit biases do not play a 
        limiting role in an employee's career trajectory. 
        Congress should immediately pass the Department of 
        State Inclusivity Act (S. 3430) to enhance diverse 
        representation of all kinds at all levels of the State 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Department.


 5. Formalize the State Department Exit Survey Process. To 
        rebuild the diplomatic corps and retain talent, the 
        Department must accurately identify and address the 
        barriers and challenges personnel face in the 
        workplace. To gain a fuller understanding of the 
        reasons Department employees depart, and ways to 
        improve, the Department must formalize its exit survey 
        process for all employees, adjust annually to address 
        issues raised in these surveys, and make key findings 
        available to Congress.


 6. Initiate a Review of How the ``Corridor Reputation'' System 
        at the Department Enables or Exacerbates the Challenges 
        Outlined in This Report. While the Department formally 
        operates on a merit-based system, there is a clear 
        understanding at the Department that one's informal 
        ``corridor reputation,'' based on the views of one's 
        peers and Bureau leadership, plays a large role in 
        one's career assignments, which can ultimately 
        determine career advancement. Most recently, diplomats 
        have expressed a hesitancy to raise concerns about 
        diversity and harassment, among other issues, for fear 
        of ruining their corridor reputation and being viewed 
        as a ``problem child.''\274\ The Department must review 
        the degree to which this corridor reputation system 
        perpetuates historic institutional deficiencies. 
        Congress must initiate a Government Accountability 
        Office review to study how this system interacts with 
        and possibly exacerbates the challenges outlined in 
        this report, and issue recommendations based on their 
        findings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \274\ See, e.g., U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Federal #MeToo: 
Examining Sexual Harassment in Government Workplaces, at 214 (Apr. 
2020); Lara Jakes, ``A Reckoning with Race to Ensure Diversity for 
America's Face Abroad,'' The New York Times, June 27, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ensuring Strong, Principled State Department Leadership
 7. Restore and Commit to Minimum Vetting Standards. To undo 
        the damage done by a series of nominees who lack the 
        experience, expertise, tone, and tenor to serve as our 
        nation's diplomats, the current and future 
        administrations must take seriously their historic duty 
        to genuinely and properly vet nominees both for their 
        qualifications as well as for any conflicts of 
        interest, misconduct, lack of good judgement, legal 
        troubles, inappropriate statements, or other 
        disqualifying behaviors. All nominees must be held to 
        the same high standards as their career employee 
        counterparts.


 8. Prioritize and Fill Senior Leadership Slots. The 
        Department's senior positions, including Under 
        Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, and Ambassadors, 
        set the stage for good leadership and help drive and 
        implement U.S. foreign policy. There must be a focus on 
        filling these positions early on in the administration, 
        or within a short period of a newly-created vacancy to 
        avoid the damaging effects of persistent vacancies left 
        open for too long or filled by acting officials.

Bolstering Accountability at the Department
 9. Maintain an Independent Inspector General. Any potential 
        fraud, waste, abuse, and misconduct at the State 
        Department must be addressed by an independent 
        Inspector General, chosen based solely on ability and 
        integrity, and free from any conflicts of interest or 
        political pressure. The ability to report misconduct to 
        the Inspector General without fear of reprisal or 
        political interference in investigations is paramount 
        to the well-being of the State Department and its 
        workforce.


10. Enforce Accountability for Improper Personnel Practices and 
        Management. Complaints to Congress and the Inspector 
        General about retaliation and other misconduct at the 
        Department have demonstrated a need for reform of the 
        Department's complaint filing and review processes. 
        Employees report feeling discouraged from lodging a 
        complaint through formal human resource channels 
        because it is reviewed by political appointees who may 
        retaliate against them and ruin their careers. Employee 
        complaints about workforce behavior must be taken 
        seriously and met with accountability by Department 
        leadership, without any politicization. Impunity for 
        misconduct cannot be allowed to continue. The 
        Department must emphasize a zero tolerance policy for 
        retaliation and reprisal, including terminating any 
        employee found to engage in such behavior, no matter 
        their status or position.

                     

    Every day, our diplomatic professionals work to ensure 
American safety and security, sometimes placing their lives on 
the line in their patriotic service. In exchange, they must be 
guaranteed the support of their leadership and a work 
environment free from politicization and discrimination. For 
the past three years, beset by extraordinary global challenges 
abroad and attacks and mismanagement at home, the work of the 
Department's career professionals to safeguard and protect our 
nation's security has been jeopardized.
    This report serves as a first step in outlining the 
challenges facing our diplomatic corps--and should serve as a 
warning of the future cost to our security if they are not 
addressed promptly. Addressing these challenges will take the 
immediate and ongoing focus of a broad coalition, including 
Congress, current and former State Department officials, civil 
society, and the current and future presidential 
administrations, dedicated to rebuilding our long-established 
and world-renowned professional diplomatic corps.

                                  [all]