Is Donald Trump improving the US government?
White House/DOGE sources claim large savings and historic results, while GAO-based reporting (Ars Technica) and critics describe those savings as overstated or unverifiable and cite institutional harm.
No single objective answer exists, as “improving the US government” is highly subjective. It depends on metrics (size/efficiency, service delivery, rule of law, policy outcomes, public trust), values (e.g., smaller government vs. robust capacity; strict enforcement vs. humanitarian considerations), and time frame. Donald Trump’s second term (inaugurated January 2025) has featured rapid, disruptive changes via executive actions, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), legislation, and personnel moves. Supporters highlight reduced bureaucracy, border control, and crime drops; critics point to chaos, overstated savings, eroded capacity/expertise, legal challenges, and low public approval.[1]
As of mid-to-late 2026 (nearly two years in), here’s a balanced overview of major developments based on government data, independent analyses, and reporting from across the spectrum.
Government Size, Efficiency, and Bureaucracy (DOGE Focus)
Trump established DOGE (initially involving Elon Musk) via executive order to cut waste, modernize IT, and shrink the federal workforce.[2]
Net: Smaller government and some waste reduction occurred, aligning with “drain the swamp” goals. Effectiveness is mixed—efficiency gains in some areas came with capacity losses and disputed fiscal impact.
Immigration and Border
Enforcement tightened dramatically via executive actions ending “catch-and-release,” restricting asylum, increasing deportations/removals, and related measures. Illegal crossings/apprehensions dropped sharply (reports of ~90%+ declines from Biden-era peaks; periods of near-zero releases into the interior). Net migration turned negative or near-zero in 2025 (first time in decades per some estimates), with claims of multi-million reductions in the illegal population. Asylum grant rates fell. Legal challenges and controversies over methods (e.g., third-country removals, detention conditions, citizen encounters) continue.[6]
This is widely cited by supporters as a clear improvement in sovereignty and order; critics highlight humanitarian costs, economic labor impacts, and overreach.
Crime and Public Safety
Violent crime and murders declined significantly in 2025 (FBI estimates and other trackers: large drops in murder, overall violent crime continuing prior trends or accelerating). The administration emphasized support for law enforcement, crackdowns on certain crimes, and related policies.[7]
Economy, Taxes, Energy, and Broader Outcomes
Deficits and debt remain major issues. Housing, real wages, and consumer sentiment have faced pressures.
Foreign Policy, Executive Actions, and Institutions
Hundreds of executive orders/memoranda (immigration, energy, DEI rollbacks, gender definitions, etc.). Actions included ceasefires (e.g., elements of Gaza), strikes (e.g., Iran-related), trade deals/tariffs, and military/personnel shifts. Pardons (including Jan. 6-related) and loyalty-focused appointments occurred.[11]
Critics (legal groups, human rights organizations, some analysts) document patterns of expanded executive power, National Guard deployments to cities, pressure on universities/media/law firms/judiciary, agency dismantling beyond statutory authority, and rights concerns (speech, immigration enforcement, etc.). Massive litigation has blocked or delayed many actions.[12]
Public Opinion and Overall Assessment
Trump’s approval ratings have declined to lows around 30–38% approve / 60%+ disapprove (net -20 to -30 range in late 2026 aggregates), weak on economy/inflation, stronger relatively on immigration among some groups. Base support remains solid; independents and broader public more negative. Midterms loom as a test.[13]
Supporters’ view: Trump is fulfilling a mandate to reverse prior policies, shrink a bloated/unaccountable state, secure borders, boost energy/economy via deregulation and deals, and restore “America First” priorities. Early results on immigration, crime, and workforce size are historic wins.[6]
Critics’ view: Changes involve chaos, exaggerated claims, damage to institutional capacity/expertise (science, aid, oversight), erosion of norms/rule of law, higher costs from tariffs/uncertainty, and policies that harm vulnerable groups or long-term interests without proportional benefits. Deficits persist; “efficiency” often meant politicization or cuts without careful analysis.[14]
Bottom line: Trump has substantially changed the US government—making it smaller in personnel, more enforcement-oriented on immigration/borders, less regulatory in certain domains, and more executive-driven. Whether this constitutes “improvement” hinges on one’s priorities. Measurable progress exists on size, border metrics, and some crime/energy indicators. Significant caveats include disputed fiscal savings, capacity/expertise losses, legal/institutional friction, mixed economic results, and low approval. Long-term effects (on services, debt, innovation, democracy, global standing) will take years to fully assess and remain contested. For the latest data, consult primary sources like BLS, CBP, FBI, BEA, GAO, OPM, and nonpartisan trackers.
Citations (14)
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2025/trump-federal-government-workers-doge/
Backs: “Supporters highlight reduced bureaucracy, border control, and crime drops; critics point to chaos, overstated savings, eroded capacity/expertise, legal challenges, and low public approval.”
attribution, article, neutral. Claim: Supporters highlight reduced bureaucracy, border control and crime drops; critics point to chaos, overstated savings, eroded capacity, legal challenges and low approval.
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/establishing-and-implementing-the-presidents-department-of-government-efficiency/?query-11-page=97&cst=
Backs: “Trump established DOGE (initially involving Elon Musk) via executive order to cut waste, modernize IT, and shrink the federal workforce.”
evidence, official document, points to yes. Claim: Trump established DOGE via executive order to cut waste, modernize IT, and shrink the federal workforce.
- https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/03/13/federal-workforce-shrank-10-in-trumps-first-year-back-in-office/
Backs: “Cuts hit agencies unevenly—steep at USAID (near-elimination), parts of HHS/Education/Agriculture/Treasury, and others; more modest at DHS or VA overall.”
statistic, article, neutral. Claim: The federal civilian workforce shrank roughly 10-12% in 2025, with uneven cuts across agencies.
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/priorities/doge/
Backs: “Some specific contract/grant cancellations and back-to-office mandates occurred.”
statistic, home page, points to yes. Claim: White House/DOGE figures cite $150-215+ billion saved and a high ratio of regulations cut.
- https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/08/doges-inflated-wall-of-receipts-96-of-grant-savings-unverifiable-gao-says/
Backs: “Critics describe arbitrary cuts, loss of expertise (e.g., science, public health, aid programs), service disruptions, and “hollowing out.” Supporters argue it was a necessary disruption of entrenched bureaucracy.”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: GAO and other analyses found DOGE's claimed savings heavily overstated or unverifiable, with about 96% of certain grant savings lacking documentation.
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2026/09/president-trump-delivers-historic-results-for-the-american-people-in-under-two-years/?query-11-page=7&cst
Backs: “Legal challenges and controversies over methods (e.g., third-country removals, detention conditions, citizen encounters) continue.”
attribution, official document, points to yes. Claim: Supporters see Trump fulfilling a mandate, with historic wins on immigration, crime and workforce size.
- https://www.factcheck.org/2026/07/trumps-numbers-july-2026-update/
Backs: “The administration emphasized support for law enforcement, crackdowns on certain crimes, and related policies.”
statistic, article, points to yes. Claim: Violent crime and murders declined significantly in 2025 per FBI estimates and trackers.
- https://home.treasury.gov/2025/
Backs: “The “One Big Beautiful Bill” (2025) extended/made permanent elements of 2017 tax cuts, added provisions like no tax on tips/overtime (temporary in some cases), senior deductions, and other changes, alongside spending adjustments.”
evidence, official document, neutral. Claim: The One Big Beautiful Bill extended 2017 tax cuts and added provisions like no tax on tips/overtime.
- https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-three-biggest-successes-after-one-year-office-11381614
Backs: “Private-sector job gains occurred, though overall slower than prior years in some analyses; federal job cuts factored in. Claimed trillions in new investments (domestic/foreign).”
statistic, article, neutral. Claim: Real GDP growth around 2-2.5%, private job gains, and claimed trillions in new investments.
- https://www.nerdwallet.com/finance/learn/state-of-the-economy
Backs: “Tariffs generated revenue (hundreds of billions claimed) and were used in negotiations but faced court setbacks, raised some costs, and created uncertainty.”
statistic, article, neutral. Claim: Inflation sticky at 2.5-3.7%; tariffs raised revenue but faced court setbacks and raised some costs.
- https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trumps-biggest-wins-and-losses-of-2025-11282468
Backs: “Pardons (including Jan. 6-related) and loyalty-focused appointments occurred.”
evidence, article, neutral. Claim: Executive orders, ceasefires, strikes, trade deals, pardons and loyalty-focused appointments occurred.
- https://www.nycbar.org/reports/the-abuse-of-presidential-power-and-breach-of-public-trust/
Backs: “Critics (legal groups, human rights organizations, some analysts) document patterns of expanded executive power, National Guard deployments to cities, pressure on universities/media/law firms/judiciary, agency dismantling beyond statutory authority, and rights concerns (speech, immigration enforcement, etc.). Massive…”
attribution, official document, points to no. Claim: Critics document expanded executive power, pressure on institutions, agency dismantling beyond statutory authority, and rights concerns.
- https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-silver-bulletin
Backs: “Base support remains solid; independents and broader public more negative. Midterms loom as a test.”
statistic, article, points to no. Claim: Trump's approval fell to roughly 30-38% approve and 60%+ disapprove in late 2026 aggregates.
- https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-trumps-washington/donald-trumps-golden-age-of-awful
Backs: ““efficiency” often meant politicization or cuts without careful analysis.”
attribution, article, points to no. Claim: Critics see chaos, exaggerated claims, damage to institutional capacity, norm erosion, and efficiency meaning politicization.