Steady Opposition: Public disapproval of Trump administration funding and workforce cuts remains strong

Author Paul Hitlin

June 10, 2026

Most Americans say changes made their lives and communities worse off

More than a year into the second Trump administration, the effort to reshape the federal government through haphazard funding cuts, workforce reductions and unilateral actions affecting programs and services is deeply unpopular among the American public.

A new survey conducted by the Partnership for Public Service finds that 52% of the public oppose the administration’s changes to the federal government compared with only 39% who are in support. Far more people say the changes have made their lives or communities worse (51%) than say they have made things better (28%). At the same time, the majority of Americans say the administration has not been effective in making the government more efficient and more people say the government is wasteful now than one year ago.

While the White House may claim to have a mandate to make dramatic cuts to the federal workforce and programs, the administration has not succeeded in convincing the public that such changes will have a positive effect on the country.

In fact, the Trump administration’s criticism of many government workers may have backfired. For several key questions in our survey, views of civil servants are at the most positive levels recorded since the Partnership began conducting yearly polling in 2021. Now, 65% of Americans say civil servants are competent, up from 57% last year. And support for a nonpartisan federal workforce has increased, despite efforts by the Trump administration to politicize many aspects of the civil service.

Even though the overall level of opposition to the administration’s efforts is similar to results from the Partnership’s survey last year, there are still many Americans who indicate they are uncertain about the ultimate consequences. About one-in-five say they do not know whether the cuts have had a positive or negative effect on their lives or communities. Even among Republicans—who mostly support these actions—there is still significant doubt as 26% say they are unsure of the overall effects. This degree of uncertainty may provide an opportunity for organizations and advocates promoting effective governance to reach a wide range of the public.

Many Americans are directly witnessing the effects of these cuts. One-in-three say that they, or someone they know, has personally been impacted. More than half say they have witnessed effects on areas such as the cost of living, while 35% say they have seen an impact on the delivery of government services such as Social Security and air travel safety.

While partisanship clearly plays a role in many people’s views on the governmental changes, supporters and opponents are sharply divided regarding the effectiveness of the changes and the view about how much direct savings will be seen by taxpayers. Overwhelmingly, supporters say the administration has been effective in making the government efficient and three-in-four believe the average taxpayer will see at least “some” savings from those efforts. By contrast, opponents do not believe the federal government has been made more efficient and very few think taxpayers will see direct benefits.

Despite claims by the Trump White House that cuts in the workforce and programs saved money for taxpayers, the actual money spent by the federal government has increased since the administration took office. In fact, the cuts have greatly harmed the economy and created new, unintended costs for the American people.

The cuts remain unpopular

As was the case last year, most Americans oppose how the Trump administration is managing the government. Now, 52% of Americans oppose their reform efforts, compared with 39% who support and 9% who say they do not know.

The overall levels of support and opposition remained steady, as have most of the splits by partisan affiliations. Eighty-nine percent of Democrats oppose the administration’s changes, as do 12% of Republicans.

There was some movement among self-described independents. Last year, 42% said they opposed the cuts and 37% were unsure. This year, it appears that some of those who were previously uncertain have changed to a more negative view. Now, more than half of independents (56%) say they are opposed and fewer say they are unsure at 27%.

When asked about the consequences of the cuts, opposition is similarly robust. About half (51%) of Americans say the Trump administration’s layoffs and funding reductions have made their life or community “worse” compared with only 28% who say the actions have made their life or community “better.” About one-in-five answered they did not know whether the actions had made things better or worse—the same percentage as last year and an indication that a large portion of the country is uncertain about how the cuts will ultimately play out and connect to them personally.

On the first day of the second Trump administration, the president issued a record 26 executive orders and established the Department of Government Efficiency that was tasked with eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. While the stated goal of DOGE—along with continuing efforts—was to cut the federal workforce and improve government efficiency, most of the country does not believe those attempts have been successful.

Fifty-two percent of Americans say the Trump administration has not been effective in making the federal government more efficient compared with 42% who say they have. Eighty-one percent of self-described Republicans agree compared with only 12% of Democrats. Among independents, 59% say they were not effective while only 23% say they were and 18% say they did not know.

The perception that the federal government is wasteful is actually greater now than it was one year ago. Three-quarters of Americans agree the government is wasteful (75%), up from 61% last year.

This increased perception occurred across the political spectrum, with the largest jump occurring among independents where 72% say the government is wasteful, up from 50% last year.

There may be several reasons why this increase occurred. It is possible that Americans realized the administration’s cuts created new inefficiencies and costs. It may also be possible that news coverage of DOGE’s work led people to learn about programs and workers they did not know about before. Regardless of the reason, Trump’s attempts to cut government spending did not sway the public in thinking that the government became less wasteful.

Similarly, Americans do not generally think the Trump administration’s cuts created much savings for taxpayers. Half the country says the cuts created “not too many” or “no” savings for taxpayers, compared with 36% who say they created “a lot” or “some.” These numbers are similar to the predictions made by Americans in the Partnership’s survey last year.

Views of civil servants and improved despite repeated attacks by the administration

Members of the Trump administration have repeatedly criticized federal workers. Prior to taking office, the current director of the Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought said he wanted federal workers to be “increasingly viewed as the villains.”

Last March, Trump addressed the loss of jobs for federal employees by saying, “Many of them don’t work at all. Many of them never showed up to work.” Former White House adviser Alina Habba said that some military veterans affected by the layoffs may not be “fit to have a job at this moment.”

These statements, along with the haphazard nature of the layoffs, constituted an unprecedented attack on the nonpartisan civil service. However, such criticisms did not decrease the public’s views of the federal workforce. In fact, it may have had the opposite effect as civil servants received the highest level of support since the Partnership started conducting yearly surveys in 2021.

Now, 61% of Americans agree that civil servants “are committed to helping people like me,” up slightly from 56% last year. Even among Republicans, that view increased from last year from 52% to 63%.

In fact, the view that civil servants are committed workers has risen each of the last four years the Partnership has conducted surveys. In 2022, 46% of the public agreed with that notion—15 percentage points lower than it is now.

The view that most civil servants are competent also increased. Now, almost two-thirds of Americans agree with that notion, up from 57% one year ago. While this increase was true for Republicans, it was especially true among independents where now, 51% agree that most are competent up from 32% last year.

Support for a nonpartisan civil service has increased

Two years ago, there was wide agreement across the political spectrum that a nonpartisan civil service was important for having a strong American democracy. Last year, such support declined significantly, particularly among Republicans, as the White House asserted more control over the hiring and firing of civil servants.

The administration also implemented rules such as Schedule Policy/Career to politicize a segment of the nonpartisan workforce that could fundamentally alter a system that values merit, expertise and professionalism over political loyalty.

As with support for civil servants, those efforts by the Trump administration did not move public opinion in their favor. Instead, 76% of Americans agree a nonpartisan civil service is important for democracy—an increase of 10 percentage points from last year. The increase occurred across the political spectrum, even among Republicans who went from 66% agreement last year to 78% agreement this year.

When asked specifically if presidents should have the right to fill any government job with people who agree with their policies, opposition increased slightly from a year ago. Now, more than half (53%) of the country do not support giving presidents such power, up from 47% last year.

^76%

of Americans agree a nonpartisan civil service is important for democracy—an increase of 10 percentage points from last year.

Where Americans are witnessing the impact of cuts

The federal funding and workforce cuts have impacted communities across the country and in areas ranging from education to safety to public health. According to this most recent survey, one-in-three Americans say they—or someone they know—has personally been impacted by the administration’s cuts.

More than half (53%) say they have seen the cuts to the government impact inflation and the cost of living. This is likely due to the fact that at the time of the survey, the issue of inflation was by far the greatest concern for Americans.

More than a third of the public believe they have witnessed an impact on the delivery of benefits and services such as Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ healthcare and tax assistance (35%). This aligns with news reports and public data showing that staff cutbacks at the Social Security Administration dramatically increased wait times for callers and cuts to the Department of Veterans Affairs have increased backlogs for veterans to receive health care and ended important research studies.

The same number of people (35%) say they noticed how government cuts impacted air traffic safety and air traffic control. The survey was conducted during a partial government shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security that created a shortage of Transportation Security Administration officers, leading to hours-long waits for passengers at some airports.

Examples of negative impacts mentioned by survey participants

“Increased TSA wait times have directly impacted me as a business commuter.”

“Services to Veterans…cutbacks have greatly impacted me (a disabled veteran) and many of the lower income folks in my community and has made travel by air even more uncomfortable.”

“Delays in response time from the Coast Guard, Social Security, IRS.”

“Unpaid federal workers rely more on charities in my community.”

“The lack of support from FEMA following disasters lately. The ice storms in Michigan over a year ago now, and more recently the tornado…only minimal assistance…It took almost two weeks for FEMA to even get [there] to assess the damage.”

“My house is surrounded by a lot of national forest service land, and due to a huge portion of the rangers being fired, it has become full of trash.”

“Scientific studies have been halted, leading to family members no longer having access to trial medications and treatments.”

“People in my community can’t get in touch with departments to apply for financial help because there’s so few staff working.”

“The cuts have caused me to have to wait longer for my retirement checks and services.”

“It is very hard to speak to a person in the Social Security office.”“The Trump administration’s federal layoffs and budget cuts affected my community by reducing access to public services, delaying important programs, and increasing workloads for remaining staff, which made it harder for people to get timely support and resources they rely on.”

“Cuts have negatively impacted meteorology and the tracking of weather systems.”

What is behind the public’s views?

Supporters and opponents of the Trump administration’s reforms agree on a few key issues. At nearly the same rate, both groups see the government as wasteful, both see the value of a nonpartisan civil service and both tend to say that civil servants are competent.

There is large disagreement, however, regarding the effectiveness of the Trump administration’s efforts and the right of a president to staff the federal workforce. Supporters also carry a strong belief that the cuts to government will result in savings for the average taxpayer.

Click to see the demographics of supporters and opponents of the cuts

What do supporters of the administration’s actions believe?

The most common reasons supporters are in favor of the government funding and workforce reductions involve the idea that cuts will make the government more efficient and decrease spending. Far fewer supporters say they back the cuts because they want to give the president more control over the government or end specific programs with which they do not agree.

More than half of supporters (55%) cite the effort to make government more efficient as one of their top reasons for their support. Forty-five percent cite cutting government spending.

By contrast, only 12% say their support is to end government programs they do not agree with and less than one-in-ten say it is to give the president more control.

Most supporters (82%) agree that a nonpartisan civil service is important for a strong democracy. Even though this group says presidents should have the right to fill the federal workforce with people who agree with them, they see the value in a nonpartisan federal workforce.

What do opponents of the administration’s actions believe?

The reasons cited by those who oppose the changes to the federal government are varied. More than 40% of opponents say the potential harm to government services is among their top concerns. Nearly the same amount say that harm to the country’s economy is a leading reason they disagree with the administration’s priorities.

Only 12% of opponents say the harm to federal employees themselves is one of their top reasons for concern about the federal cuts.

Disagreement on the effectiveness of the administration’s cuts and the impact on American taxpayers

Supporters and opponents view the implementation and consequences of the administration’s changes quite differently. Supporters overwhelmingly see the efforts as successful—90% say the administration has been effective in making government more efficient compared with only 9% of opponents.

Despite significant evidence that cuts and layoffs have cost the government and economy more money than it saved, 76% of supporters say the administration has created “a lot” or “some” savings for the American taxpayer. Only 11% of opponents of the reforms feel the same way.

The belief that the Trump cuts will ultimately result in benefits for the public is clearly a strong motivation for supporters. As one survey respondent suggested, “[The Trump changes have] cut wasteful spending, which means [our] taxes will not go up.” “Layoffs and cuts to the federal government has [led] to more economic efficiency and lower taxes,” wrote another.

Conclusion

The results of the Partnership’s research show that Trump’s haphazard and unilateral workforce and funding reductions are deeply unpopular, and the administration is out of step with the views of most of the public. There is a widespread belief that the cutbacks have had a negative impact on the lives of Americans. Furthermore, the public’s positive views of civil servants have increased over the past year, as has the perceived importance of a nonpartisan federal workforce.

After decades of growing distrust in government, however, these findings reinforce a general dissatisfaction with government and a need for comprehensive reform. As the country celebrates its 250th anniversary this summer, we have an opportunity to lay out a new path to make government work better and to consider how positive civic action can help create a better government while also addressing concerns regarding efficiency and costs.

The Partnership for Public Service is looking to help define the path forward in two major ways. First, the Partnership is marking the 250th anniversary by promoting civic engagement and conversations about the future of the federal government. Second, the Partnership’s Government for a New Era initiative is focused on developing ideas and plans to improve government in the coming years.

These collaborative efforts with policymakers, practitioners, stakeholder groups and members of the public are aimed at advancing bold, forward-looking improvements to make the government more effective, responsive and accountable.