Interior Secretary Burgum Faces Scrutiny Over Unusual Staff Demands

FARGO, N.D. — Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has recently come under scrutiny for a series of unusual requests to his staff, prompting concern within the Department of the Interior and reaching senior White House officials. According to multiple sources who spoke to The Atlantic, his chief of staff asked political appointees to regularly bake chocolate-chip cookies for Burgum and guests at the department headquarters.

These cookie-baking requests have been among several behaviors described as excessive. Sources noted that Burgum also instructed staff to serve meals during a recent lunch meeting with Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission head Mark Christie. On at least one occasion, a political appointee was reportedly tasked with remaking cookies deemed subpar.

Four individuals familiar with the secretary’s leadership style, speaking anonymously due to restrictions on public comments, expressed concern over what they described as demanding behavior. One person referred to him as “Doug the diva,” highlighting the distress this culture has caused among staff, with reports of political appointees crying under the pressure of these demands.

“These pathetic smears are from unnamed cowards who don’t know Doug Burgum and are trying to stop President Trump’s Energy Dominance agenda,” Interior Department spokesperson Katie Martin defended in a statement. She emphasized that Secretary Burgum operates with gratitude and humility in his work alongside the president.

Contrary to the claims made against Burgum, two officials within the department defended the cookie practice, stating that the cookies were made from premade dough and served out of hospitality to visitors. They also noted that the use of political appointees to serve food during meetings is standard due to the absence of a cafeteria at the Interior Department headquarters.

One of the more controversial actions attributed to Burgum’s administration was the use of a U.S. Park Police helicopter to transport him to Andrews Air Force Base when his team feared he would miss his flight with President Trump. While it is par for the course for presidents to use helicopters for such trips, it is less common for Interior secretaries, who generally complete the journey by car.

“When it was clear that afternoon D.C. traffic would not allow him to travel by vehicle, the decision was made to take a helicopter to ensure he arrived at Andrews on time to staff President Trump, which is a core mission of the Secretary of the Interior,” Martin stated regarding the helicopter trip.

Burgum’s leadership style has drawn comparisons with previous Cabinet secretaries who faced criticism during the Trump administration. Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt resigned amid investigations concerning excessive spending, while other officials faced scrutiny for utilizing government resources for personal gain.

Before his appointment, Burgum, the former North Dakota governor, had aspirations for a higher-profile role within the administration. He was a finalist for Trump’s running mate in the 2020 election. His tenure as Secretary of the Interior includes responsibilities for managing significant federal lands and relationships with Native American tribes.

Staff dynamics have appeared contentious in recent months, with allegations that some political appointees have been pushed beyond their typical roles. Reports indicate that one of Burgum’s unusual requests has included having staff stack firewood in his office’s fireplace and even removing labels from water bottles to prevent branding concerns when taking photographs.

Despite the criticisms, some former colleagues and staff members defend Burgum’s character and leadership style. A close adviser emphasized that, in extensive interactions, Burgum demonstrated no arrogance and routinely expresses gratitude toward his team, transforming meetings into opportunities for acknowledgment.

The unfolding story of Burgum’s leadership approach reflects broader concerns regarding expectations for political appointees within the Cabinet and the nature of service in government roles.