Musk Aides Restrict Government Access to Personnel Data Amid Sweeping Overhaul
Washington, D.C. – Aides to Elon Musk, who has been tasked by President Donald Trump to overhaul the federal workforce, have restricted access to critical computer systems at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), according to agency officials.
Since Trump’s return to office 11 days ago, his administration has launched an aggressive effort to reshape the government, removing hundreds of career officials and promoting loyalists. Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla and owner of X, has moved swiftly to install allies at OPM, the agency responsible for managing the federal workforce of 2.2 million civilian employees.
Two OPM officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, revealed that some career employees have lost access to sensitive personnel databases, including the Enterprise Human Resources Integration (EHRI) system. This vast repository contains personal details on federal employees, such as Social Security numbers, addresses, salary information, and performance records.
“We have no visibility into what they are doing with the data,” one official said. “It creates real cybersecurity and hacking risks, and there’s no oversight.”
While affected officials can still access email and basic systems, their ability to monitor personnel records and workforce changes has been severely restricted.
Unconventional Leadership and Musk’s Influence
Musk’s associates have moved quickly to exert control over OPM, going as far as installing sofa beds on the fifth floor of the agency’s headquarters, an unusual move reminiscent of Musk’s management style at X (formerly Twitter), where he famously encouraged employees to sleep in the office.
The upheaval at OPM mirrors similar disruptions at the Treasury Department, where Musk’s allies reportedly demanded access to payment systems, leading to the departure of a top-ranking career official.
Among the key Musk loyalists now overseeing OPM:
Brian Bjelde, a longtime SpaceX executive, now serving as a senior adviser.
Amanda Scales, a former Musk employee, appointed as OPM’s chief of staff.
Riccardo Biasini, a former Tesla and Boring Company engineer, now a senior adviser.
These appointees have wasted no time in implementing drastic changes, including memos sent to all federal employees encouraging them to take buyouts and leave their jobs with up to eight months’ pay.
“No one here knew these memos were coming,” an OPM official said. “We’re learning about them at the same time as the public.”
Implications: A Power Struggle Over Government Control
The situation at OPM highlights a broader shift in Trump’s approach to governance—reducing the influence of career civil servants and replacing them with politically aligned personnel. The move reflects long-standing conservative frustration with the federal bureaucracy, often referred to as the “deep state.”
However, this raises critical concerns:
Cybersecurity Risks: Blocking career officials from sensitive systems without clear oversight increases the potential for data breaches, insider threats, or improper use of federal employee information.
Transparency & Accountability: With Musk’s team controlling personnel data, Congress, oversight agencies, and the public have little visibility into hiring and firing decisions.
Legal & Ethical Questions: While Trump has the authority to reshape the executive branch, mass removals of career officials could violate civil service protections and lead to legal challenges.
Comparisons to Past Political Purges
Nixon’s “Saturday Night Massacre” (1973)
President Richard Nixon ordered the firing of Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox, leading to the resignation of top Justice Department officials.
Similarities: A power struggle between the executive branch and career officials.
Key Difference: Nixon’s actions were a targeted attempt to obstruct an investigation, whereas Trump’s OPM overhaul appears aimed at long-term bureaucratic control.
George W. Bush’s U.S. Attorney Firings (2006)
The Bush administration dismissed nine U.S. attorneys, allegedly for political reasons, sparking accusations of interference in justice.
Similarities: The removals were framed as policy-based but seen as politically motivated.
Key Difference: The Bush firings were limited to prosecutors, while Trump’s restructuring targets an entire federal workforce.
Trump’s Own 2020 Loyalty Purges
During his first term, Trump dismissed officials he perceived as disloyal, including FBI Director James Comey, Inspector General Michael Atkinson, and Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
The 2025 actions are an expansion of this strategy, aiming to control federal agencies from within.
What Comes Next?
Congressional Democrats and civil service advocates are likely to push back, possibly launching investigations into OPM’s handling of personnel data. Meanwhile, legal experts will scrutinize whether these actions violate federal employment protections.
For federal workers, the message is clear: the bureaucracy is no longer neutral ground, and those unwilling to align with the administration may find themselves pushed out.
The long-term consequences could be profound, reshaping how the government operates for years, if not decades, to come.
