Is Loyalty Testing Undermining Expertise at the National Weather Service?
The National Weather Service’s new hiring questions demanding support for President Trump’s executive orders threaten to politicize science and weaken America’s weather readiness.
As the National Weather Service (NWS) scrambles to refill hundreds of critical positions slashed under the previous administration’s misguided cuts, a troubling development has emerged: potential hires must explain how they would advance President Donald Trump’s agenda. This political litmus test for scientific roles raises urgent questions about whether ideology is being prioritized over expertise—a dangerous precedent with real consequences for American safety and sovereignty.
When Did Political Alignment Become a Job Requirement in Science?
The NWS parent agency requires applicants for meteorologist roles to identify one or two of Trump’s executive orders (EOs) that resonate with them and explain how they would help implement those directives. While framed as part of a “merit hiring plan” announced by Trump, this conflation of policy allegiance with meteorological skill jeopardizes the very mission of forecasting weather accurately to protect our communities.
Experts warn it is irrelevant—and reckless—to demand knowledge of civics where scientific knowledge should reign supreme. Rick Spinrad, former NOAA chief under President Biden, rightly asks: “Will this make forecasts any better?” The answer is clear: No. What matters is mastery of meteorology, hydrology, physics, and IT—not political allegiance.
America Deserves Forecasters Focused on Truth, Not Politics
Under the guise of “government efficiency,” we are witnessing a politicization that threatens public trust and national security. When Trump took office, deep staffing cuts left NOAA short hundreds of forecasters—a gap only now being addressed but clouded by these controversial screening questions.
Trump’s track record on environmental science further compounds concerns. His executive orders rolled back vital climate protections and halted monitoring programs essential to understanding planet-warming gases—moves that undermine long-term American resilience against increasingly severe weather events.
The push to prioritize loyalty tests over qualifications echoes broader trends seen elsewhere in government agencies where dissent is silenced and professional expertise sidelined. At the National Weather Service, such politicization risks delaying or degrading critical warnings that save lives during hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods—events that show no favor to political ideologies.
If we allow ideology to dictate who serves in our scientific institutions, how can we expect reliable forecasts? How long will Washington continue sacrificing competence for conformity? The answer should be clear for every patriotic American who values freedom, safety, and truth.
The NWS must return to its core mission: protecting American families with timely, accurate weather information—not serving as a platform for political messaging disguised as hiring protocol. It is time for leaders who champion national sovereignty to demand merit-based appointments uncompromised by partisan tests.