Is Donald Trump improving the US government?

Whether Donald Trump’s administration is improving the U.S. government is a subject of intense national debate, with deeply divided viewpoints. Since returning to office for a second presidential term in 2025, President Trump has enacted major structural changes to the federal bureaucracy.

The debate over these actions centers on two competing philosophies: one that values democratic responsiveness and efficiency through strong executive control, and another that values stability and expertise through an independent, nonpartisan civil service.

Arguments that Donald Trump is improving the government

Supporters argue that his administration’s efforts are necessary to streamline a bloated, inefficient, and unresponsive federal bureaucracy, bringing much-needed reform.

•Restoring Democratic Responsiveness: A core tenet of the Trump administration's agenda is ensuring that unelected, career federal employees do not block or subvert the policies of the elected president. In June 2026, Trump signed an executive order implementing Schedule Policy/Career (a modified version of his first-term "Schedule F" proposal), reclassifying approximately 8,000 high-level career policymaking positions into "at-will" employment. Proponents argue this allows the administration to quickly remove senior officials who exhibit poor performance, misconduct, or resistance to lawful presidential directives.

•Cutting Waste and Enhancing Efficiency: To tackle federal spending and bureaucracy, Trump established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Operating as a temporary initiative until July 2026, DOGE aimed to modernize technology, identify waste, and optimize the federal workforce. Supporters point to the separation of over 260,000 federal employees (through layoffs, early retirements, and deferred resignations) and the administration's claims of billions in taxpayer savings as evidence of a leaner, more cost-effective government.

•Reforming Performance and Hiring: The administration has introduced measures to reform how federal employees are hired and retained. For example, the administration established new rules requiring agencies to actively determine whether probationary employees' performance warrants long-term retention, rather than granting them permanent tenure by default. Proponents believe this instills a more rigorous corporate-style work culture within government.

Arguments that Donald Trump is harming the government

Critics, including government employee unions, public administration experts, and political opponents, argue that these changes undermine the integrity, stability, and legality of the federal government.

•Politicizing the Civil Service: Critics argue that stripping civil service protections from thousands of senior career employees under Schedule Policy/Career threatens the traditional, nonpartisan nature of the federal workforce. Opponents view this as a return to a 19th-century "spoils system," where federal jobs are awarded based on political loyalty rather than merit and expertise. They argue this could lead to a less competent government run by political ideologues.

•Eroding Accountability and Whistleblower Protections: Under the new Schedule Policy/Career rules, reclassified employees can no longer appeal disciplinary actions or terminations to the independent Merit Systems Protection Board. Furthermore, if they file whistleblower complaints, these are investigated internally by their own agency rather than the independent Office of Special Counsel. Critics warn this creates a "chilling effect," making civil servants afraid to report waste, fraud, abuse, or unlawful orders.

•Operational Disruption and Loss of Expertise: Opponents contend that the rapid and massive workforce reductions spearheaded by DOGE have severely degraded the government's ability to deliver basic services, resulting in a loss of critical institutional knowledge. Following the termination of DOGE in mid-2026, some federal agencies reportedly began reversing staffing cuts to restore operational capacity.

•Negative Public Perception: Public polling indicates that these dramatic changes are controversial. A mid-2026 survey by the Partnership for Public Service found that 52% of Americans opposed the administration's changes to the federal government. The same poll showed that three-quarters of Americans believed the government remained wasteful, with a majority feeling the administration had not been effective in making it more efficient.

Conclusion

Whether these actions represent an "improvement" depends on one's perspective on the role of the presidency.

Those who believe the federal government has become an unaccountable "deep state" see Trump’s actions as a bold, positive effort to return power to the voters by asserting direct presidential control. Conversely, those who view a professional, nonpartisan civil service as a cornerstone of American democracy see these policies as a dangerous centralization of executive power that weakens oversight, transparency, and the rule of law.

Citations (12)

1ballotpedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.89
ballotpedia.org
Backs: “Since returning to office for a second presidential term in 2025, President Trump has enacted major structural changes to the federal bureaucracy.”
2globalgovernmentforum.comNews and media
globalgovernmentforum.com
Backs: “Since returning to office for a second presidential term in 2025, President Trump has enacted major structural changes to the federal bureaucracy.”
3whitehouse.govGovernment
whitehouse.gov
Backs: “Restoring Democratic Responsiveness: A core tenet of the Trump administration's agenda is ensuring that unelected, career federal employees do not block or subvert the policies of the elected president. In June 2026, Trump signed an executive order implementing Schedule Policy/Career (a modified version of his…”
4washingtonpost.comNews and mediaquality 0.82
washingtonpost.com
Backs: “In June 2026, Trump signed an executive order implementing Schedule Policy/Career (a modified version of his first-term "Schedule F" proposal), reclassifying approximately 8,000 high-level career policymaking positions into "at-will" employment. Proponents argue this allows the administration to quickly remove senior…”
5ballotpedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.89
ballotpedia.org
Backs: “In June 2026, Trump signed an executive order implementing Schedule Policy/Career (a modified version of his first-term "Schedule F" proposal), reclassifying approximately 8,000 high-level career policymaking positions into "at-will" employment. Proponents argue this allows the administration to quickly remove senior…”
6wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “Cutting Waste and Enhancing Efficiency: To tackle federal spending and bureaucracy, Trump established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Operating as a temporary initiative until July 2026, DOGE aimed to modernize technology, identify waste, and optimize the federal workforce.”
7wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “Cutting Waste and Enhancing Efficiency: To tackle federal spending and bureaucracy, Trump established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Operating as a temporary initiative until July 2026, DOGE aimed to modernize technology, identify waste, and optimize the federal workforce.”
8narfe.orgNonprofits and think tanks
narfe.org
Backs: “Supporters point to the separation of over 260,000 federal employees (through layoffs, early retirements, and deferred resignations) and the administration's claims of billions in taxpayer savings as evidence of a leaner, more cost-effective government. Reforming Performance and Hiring: The administration has…”
9afge.orgNonprofits and think tanks
afge.org
Backs: “Politicizing the Civil Service: Critics argue that stripping civil service protections from thousands of senior career employees under Schedule Policy/Career threatens the traditional, nonpartisan nature of the federal workforce. Opponents view this as a return to a 19th-century "spoils system," where federal jobs are…”
10kettering.orgNonprofits and think tanks
kettering.org
Backs: “Opponents view this as a return to a 19th-century "spoils system," where federal jobs are awarded based on political loyalty rather than merit and expertise. They argue this could lead to a less competent government run by political ideologues.”
11ourpublicservice.orgNonprofits and think tanks
ourpublicservice.org
Backs: “A mid-2026 survey by the Partnership for Public Service found that 52% of Americans opposed the administration's changes to the federal government. The same poll showed that three-quarters of Americans believed the government remained wasteful, with a majority feeling the administration had not been effective in…”
12americanprogress.orgNonprofits and think tanks
americanprogress.org
Backs: “Conversely, those who view a professional, nonpartisan civil service as a cornerstone of American democracy see these policies as a dangerous centralization of executive power that weakens oversight, transparency, and the rule of law. 1.”