Federal government buyouts threaten U.S. national security, ex-officials say

The Trump administration's offer to extend deferred resignations to members of the intelligence community as part of the federal buyouts being offered to trim the size of the government poses a grave threat to U.S. national security interests, lawmakers and former officials said Wednesday.

Employees at the nation's foremost intelligence collection and analysis outfits -- including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Security Agency -- received email notices over the last week offering them the opportunity to leave their roles yet continue to be paid through September, multiple sources confirmed to ABC News.

Unlike similar offers extended to employees at other federal agencies, U.S. officials said not all intelligence workers are eligible for the buyouts and certain resignations will be reviewed before a decision is made about whether they can be accepted.

Nevertheless, the deferred resignation offers were met by many in the intelligence community with a mix of "frustration and anger," said one former CIA officer who remains in contact with current administration officials. The former official said that "their frustration comes from watching an illogical policy jeopardize the mission they've dedicated their careers to protecting."

Rep. Jim Himes, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, echoed that sentiment, telling ABC News in a statement that the buyouts "serve only to hollow out the very agencies we call on to protect our national security and insult the men and women who have dedicated their lives to keeping Americans safe."

A CIA spokesperson characterized the offers as being "part of a holistic strategy to infuse the Agency with renewed energy, provide opportunities for rising leaders to emerge, and better position the CIA to deliver on its mission."

But former officials questioned whether the administration had fully considered the consequences of arbitrarily allowing highly trained intelligence officials to leave their posts.

"What capabilities are we going to lose? What is the plan to replace that capability when they walk out the door?" asked Charles Kupperman, a former deputy national security adviser during Trump's first term. "I do not think the administration is taking that loss seriously."

Many roles in the intelligence community, particularly those in operations and analysis, require years of tradecraft, weapons, and language training.

Darrell Blocker, an ABC News contributor and former CIA officer who oversaw the agency's storied training facility, said "from the moment operations officers take the oath to the time they reach full performance" can take up to eight years.

"Decisions being made today will have an impact on our national security over the next decade, based on the training cycle," Blocker said.

Losing experienced intelligence analysts presents a different set of challenges. Brian O'Neill, a former CIA executive, said the buyouts would unequivocally undermine the intelligence community's substantial "institutional knowledge."

The senior officers and analysts most inclined to accept buyouts are high performers with the talent to pursue lucrative work in the private sector, O'Neill suggested. Conversely, the policy may lead lower performers with fewer job prospects to remain in their roles, he said.

"This policy reflects a misguided, shotgun approach that will gut the Agency's core expertise and stability," O'Neill said.

Former officials also expressed alarm at reports Wednesday that the CIA had shared a list of all employees hired within the past two years with the White House Office of Management and Budget in compliance with Trump's executive order seeking to reduce the federal workforce.

A U.S. official confirmed to ABC News that the agency shared the first names and last initials of new employees over a nonclassified system, prompting scrutiny of what former officials called a potential counterintelligence risk. The email was first reported by the New York Times.

Andrew Bakaj, an attorney who once served in the intelligence community's office of inspector general, said the administration's actions "underscore the extent to which the Trump administration is willing to sell out national security."

"Our adversaries abroad are celebrating these purges," Bakaj said.

The CIA defended its sharing of the new employees' names, with a CIA spokesperson telling ABC News, "We are complying with the Executive Orders, and are providing requested information through the appropriate channels."