Is Donald Trump improving the US government?

Both sidesSays it is contestedSources conflict

The White House release claims large efficiency savings and reforms, while the GovExec analysis of the Partnership for Public Service finds the workforce changes cost the economy over $165.6 billion and reduced effectiveness.

Is Trump improving how the government works? I'll pull recent reporting on his reforms and what critics say in response.

Whether Donald Trump is improving the U.S. government depends on how improvement is measured, and assessments differ sharply.

Claims of Improvement by the Administration and Supporters

The White House describes the second Trump administration as delivering historic government reform:

•The administration claims unprecedented government efficiency reforms have saved an estimated $215 billion — about $1,335 per taxpayer — and shrunk the federal workforce to its lowest level since 1966. The administration's deregulatory mandate is projected to save the U.S. economy $1.5 trillion in FY2026 alone.

•The administration also states it revoked the Obama-era Endangerment Finding, described as the single-largest deregulatory action worth $1.3 trillion, and that the U.S. achieved record domestic oil and gas production.

•Other claimed reforms include a 74% drop in the backlog of veterans waiting for benefits, and that Vice President Vance's Fraud Task Force has uncovered over $260 billion in fraud since January 2025.

•The White House says President Trump has driven sweeping reforms to eliminate waste, reduce bureaucracy, and restore accountability across the Federal government.

On workforce size, independent reporting notes:

•The federal workforce has seen a net decrease of about 264,000 employees since the start of the second Trump administration, according to Office of Personnel Management data.

•During its stint, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), under Elon Musk's guidance, managed to cut nearly 12 percent of the federal civilian workforce.

DOGE itself, established by President Trump to cut federal spending and streamline operations, claimed $160 billion to $215 billion in gross savings primarily through cancelled contracts, leases and administrative rollbacks. Supporters frame this as cutting bureaucratic bloat.

The Office of Personnel Management stated that under President Trump it delivered a more accountable and effective federal workforce, making government leaner and more focused on results.

Criticism and Counter-Assessments

Other analyses and polls present a more negative assessment:

•The Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan nonprofit, released a report concluding that workforce reductions have decreased the effectiveness of government services, not achieved stated efficiency goals and were conducted with minimal transparency.

•The same group estimated the administration's reforms cost the U.S. economy more than $165.6 billion, according to a new estimate. The group said: "This is an administration that has claimed that it is trying to reduce waste, and yet the choices that it has made have created phenomenally larger waste".

•The $165.6 billion figure includes nearly $53.2 billion tied to disengaged civil servants, more than $4.5 billion to pay individuals who left under the deferred resignation program, and other costs for severance and administrative leave. The Partnership also reported cuts to grants from science agencies have cost the economy approximately $94.6 billion.

•Americans' satisfaction with public-facing services provided by the federal government has fallen for the first time in five years, according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index.

•Initial DOGE savings targets were much higher. The initiative initially aimed to eliminate $2 trillion in waste, later reduced to $150 billion, and by dissolution claimed $215 billion, though independent analyses have cast doubt on the accuracy of reported savings.

•Public opinion is divided. On handling of the federal workforce, the president stood at 40% approval and 55% disapproval in a Quinnipiac survey. An average of national polls in late 2025 put Trump at 43.4% approval and 53.3% disapproval.

Context

Evaluations often depend on priorities: supporters emphasize reduced workforce size, deregulation, and claimed fiscal savings; critics emphasize service disruptions, legal challenges, economic costs, and lower satisfaction scores. Long-term effects of the structural changes remain under study.

Citations (2)

1whitehouse.govGovernment
President Trump Delivers Historic Results for the American People in Under Two Years
Backs: “Claims of Improvement by the Administration and Supporters. The White House describes the second Trump administration as delivering historic government reform: The administration claims unprecedented government efficiency reforms have saved an estimated $215 billion — about $1,335 per taxpayer — and shrunk the federal…”
attribution, official document, points to yes. Claim: The White House says the administration's efficiency reforms saved about $215 billion, shrank the federal workforce, and delivered historic government reform.
2govexec.comNews and mediaquality 0.87
Trump’s federal workforce changes cost the economy more than $165.6B, analysis finds
Backs: “The Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan nonprofit, released a report concluding that workforce reductions have decreased the effectiveness of government services, not achieved stated efficiency goals and were conducted with minimal transparency. The same group estimated the administration's reforms cost the…”
statistic, article, points to no. Claim: The Partnership for Public Service concluded workforce reductions lowered government effectiveness and cost the economy more than $165.6 billion.