Daniel Wolfram
An unprecedented demand to prove that diplomats voted for Trump sparks outrage and congressional investigations into the State Department.
American diplomats seeking career promotions recently experienced an unusual demand not seen before in the US government.
According to The Washington Sun, the State Department asked Foreign Service staff whom they voted for in the past three presidential elections.
Six current and former department officials confirmed that this has become standard protocol when diplomats in the State Department are up for a promotion.
A MAGA loyalty test
Department officials in leadership delivered an uncompromising message to everyone seeking to advance their career in the department: Be a MAGA loyalist and support Trump’s agenda or forget about working at the State Department for long.
Staff hoping to reach senior roles had to show they had voted for Donald Trump in the previous three elections, while past donations to Democrats and other political support meant instant disqualification.
Democratic lawmakers are already fighting back. Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire stated that “individuals should be chosen for their experience and ability, not their political loyalty.” She also confirmed that congressional committees are now gathering evidence for a thorough investigation into the matter.
Demanding total ‘fidelity’
Department leadership avoided direct answers about the loyalty and Trump-voting question. Instead, a spokesperson emphasized “fidelity,” describing it as “executing the president’s vision for foreign policy.” The agency insists that Secretary Marco Rubio is simply prioritizing merit and rewarding workers who deliver on administrative goals.
Federal law directly bans evaluating civil servants based on how they vote or which party they support. Unlike political appointees who turn over when a new administration takes office, diplomats must remain neutral, and it is not the White House’s obligation to decipher who is “loyal.”
One applicant told the Washington Sun that the revised entrance exam felt designed to reward specific ideological answers rather than merit. Meanwhile, a recruitment firm was awarded a $1 million contract after its chief executive claimed the department was “too woke.”
Legal battles are quickly taking shape. Max Stier of the Partnership for Public Service called the department’s actions an “appalling and flagrant disregard of federal law.” He warned that the administration is “hurtling our government back in time to the spoils system of the 19th century.”
