Is Donald Trump improving the US government?

Both sidesSays it is contested

Short answer: It depends on what you mean by “improving,” and on which evidence you prioritize. I don’t have data after October 2024, so I can’t assess any changes that may have occurred during a current term. Below is a concise way to think about it, plus what we know from his 2017–2021 term and what to check now.

What “improving the government” can mean

•Capacity and competence: ability to staff agencies, follow law, implement programs well

•Efficiency and service: faster, simpler processes; better customer experience

•Accountability and integrity: independent oversight, merit-based civil service, ethics

•Legal durability: policies that survive court review

•Fiscal stewardship: waste reduction, improper payments, program performance

•Public trust and workforce health: employee morale, retention, scientific integrity

Evidence from Trump’s 2017–2021 term (high-level, mixed)

•Deregulation and permitting: Pushed aggressive rollback of rules (e.g., EO 13771), claimed net reductions in regulatory costs and faster permitting timelines. Supporters see this as cutting red tape; critics argue many repeals weakened protections and bypassed robust analysis.

•Legal durability: Atypical rate of court losses in administrative cases compared with prior administrations, often for procedural/Administrative Procedure Act issues. Critics say this reflects weak process; supporters say courts resisted needed change.

•Staffing and vacancies: Unusually high turnover and frequent use of acting officials; some appointments drew GAO and court scrutiny. Critics argue this undercut capacity and legality; defenders say it enabled speed amid Senate delays.

•Oversight and civil service: Friction with Inspectors General and steps toward reclassifying policy-related civil service roles (e.g., “Schedule F” order in 2020, later revoked). Supporters call this accountability; critics warn of politicization and weakened merit protections.

•Workforce morale and expertise: Sharp attrition in some expert shops (e.g., USDA ERS/NIFA relocations; senior departures at State). Effects varied by agency; some saw improvements, others declines.

•Service delivery: Mixed. Examples include VA reforms with some backlog reductions, but persistent issues elsewhere (FOIA backlogs rose at many agencies; uneven pandemic response alongside the notable success of Operation Warp Speed).

•Ethics and norms: Frequent norm-breaking (e.g., use of government communications, political rhetoric in official settings) raised concerns about institutional integrity for critics; supporters viewed this as challenging a resistant bureaucracy.

How to judge “improvement” now (what to check post-2024)
Since I don’t have post–Oct 2024 data, the best way to answer your question today is to look at fresh, concrete indicators:

•Capacity and legality

•GAO’s High-Risk List: Are problem areas shrinking or growing?

•Court outcomes: Win/loss rates in APA/administrative challenges to major actions

•Vacancy and acting-official rates in Senate-confirmed positions

•Efficiency and service

•OMB/OIRA data on rulemaking throughput and cost-benefit quality

•Customer experience metrics (IRS wait times, SSA/VA processing times, passport backlogs)

•FOIA timeliness and backlog stats (DOJ OIP annual reports)

•Accountability and integrity

•Status and independence of Inspectors General (vacancies, removals, reported retaliation)

•Civil service changes (any moves resembling Schedule F; whistleblower cases)

•Scientific integrity policies and advisory committees’ functioning

•Workforce health

•OPM Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) engagement and intent-to-leave

•Partnership for Public Service “Best Places to Work” scores

•Fiscal stewardship and management

•Improper payment rates; Payment Integrity Information Act reporting

•IT and procurement oversight (FITARA scorecards; major system modernization progress)

•Public trust

•Pew or Gallup measures of trust in federal government and confidence in key institutions

How different perspectives answer the question

•Supporters typically argue yes: streamlined rules and permitting, willingness to confront an unresponsive bureaucracy, and a results-over-process approach that, in their view, prioritizes citizens and businesses.

•Critics typically argue no: elevated politicization, weaker oversight, higher legal vulnerability of actions, expertise loss, and erosion of norms that underpin long-run government effectiveness.

If you tell me which dimensions you care most about (e.g., faster services vs. institutional safeguards), I can tailor the answer and suggest the most relevant, up-to-date indicators to check.

Is Donald Trump improving the US government?

Citations (0)