Americans Say Government Is Corrupt and Inefficient but Are Lukewarm About DOGE
Democrats seem willing to tolerate a lot to get a larger government, but Republicans aren’t much better.

Americans think government is wasteful when it's not outright fraudulent and abusive. That should create a welcoming environment for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its mission to cut fat out of federal agencies on the way to (hopefully) reducing the state and balancing the budget. But support for DOGE is lukewarm. Unsurprisingly in these politically fractured times, cost-cutting efforts are a lot more popular with Republicans than Democrats, but polling suggests the division isn't just one of partisanship. The DOGE is running up against fundamental disagreements over the role of government and the people who staff it—and the price people are willing to pay for a less-obnoxious government.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Corrupt and Inefficient Government, but Iffy Support for DOGE
Last year, Pew Research polling found that 56 percent of Americans say government is "almost always wasteful and inefficient." The Babbie Centre at Chapman University reported that "nearly 2/3 of Americans fear that our government is run by corrupt officials." And last month, A.P.-NORC researchers found 70 percent of Americans believe corruption is a major problem in the federal government, 65 percent say the same of inefficiency, and 59 percent see red tape—including regulations and bureaucracy—as a major problem.
Yet DOGE draws just a 39 percent "favorable" rating in the latest The Economist/YouGov poll, a bare three points ahead of "unfavorable" at 36 percent (25 percent picked "don't know"). A poll this month from Trafalgar Group found 49 percent approving of the cost-cutting efforts of DOGE and Elon Musk, with 44 percent disapproving (7 percent were undecided). That's more support than opposition in both cases, but you'd expect greater enthusiasm from a public that overwhelmingly considers government to be corrupt and wasteful (with plenty of evidence to support that position).
Part of the explanation, of course, is partisanship. Anything done by officials from one of the major parties is bound to be booed by the opposition, no matter what. As Gallup's Jeffrey M. Jones pointed out in 2022, "generally speaking, Republicans and Democrats are more inclined to say the government has too much power when the president is from the other party, and less inclined when a president from their own party is in the White House." That tribalism likely extends to cutting government as well, even if the cuts apply to agencies controlled for the moment by political enemies. Sure enough, both Trafalgar and The Economist/YouGov found far greater support for DOGE among Republicans than among Democrats (independents split the difference).
Democrats Want More Government, Flaws and All
But there are also real differences in attitudes toward the role of the state. The same Pew poll that reported widespread belief in the wastefulness and inefficiency of government also found that 49 percent of respondents "would prefer a smaller government providing fewer services" while 48 percent "would rather have a bigger government providing more services." And the partisan divide here isn't just tribal, it's ideological. Despite fluctuations depending on who is in power, Republicans have overwhelmingly favored a smaller government providing fewer services since polling on the issue began in 1976 (support for bigger government peaked among them at about one-third in 1988 and 2004). Democratic support for larger, more active government grew from 49 percent in 1976 to 74 percent now.
Democrats in the A.P.-NORC poll were just slightly kinder than Republicans in their opinions on government corruption, efficiency, and red tape; majorities agree the federal government is corrupt and inefficient, while a 47 percent plurality says that red tape is a major problem. Given the overwhelming belief that government is corrupt and wasteful, but iffy support for DOGE, it's fair to conclude that at least some Democrats are willing to put up with those concerns as the price of a larger state.
Partisan disagreement over the role of government also applies to trust in the people who staff the federal bureaucracy. These are the people the Trump administration offered buyouts and seeks to reduce in number, much like the Clinton administration did in the 1990s. Support for reducing the federal workforce depends, to a large extent, on agreement that those workers are part of the problem—or at least that we'd be better off with fewer of them. That's not a universal opinion.
"Just 38% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents express a great deal or a fair amount of confidence in federal career employees," Pew Research noted last week. That's down 10 points from 2018. "In contrast, 72% of Democrats and Democratic leaners say they have confidence in career government employees – 7 points higher than in 2022, but on par with 2018 levels."
So, if we're to believe what members of the public tell researchers, majorities of Americans across partisan divides think the federal government is corrupt and inefficient. But a fair number of those who hold this position—Democrats, in particular—are confident that the people employed by the federal government aren't responsible for that corruption and efficiency. Those problems appear from somewhere, perhaps as a miasma emanating from the swamp that D.C. was in years past. Also, many of those concerned that corruption and inefficiency plague the government are willing to put up with those handicaps so that the corrupt and inefficient government can play a larger role in our lives.
Republicans Also Want Their Expensive Goodies
Of course, consistency and logic aren't necessarily common features of public opinion. As I've noted before, Republicans and Democrats may disagree when it comes to broad philosophical statements about the size and role of government, but when it comes to specifics, there's more that unites them than divides them. Majorities of partisans of both parties as well as of independents want more federal spending on Social Security, Education, and Medicare, according to A.P.-NORC. A majority of Democrats also want more to be spent on Medicaid and assistance to the poor, while a majority of Republicans similarly want more dedicated to border security and the military.
Social Security is almost a quarter of federal spending all by itself, while Medicare, Medicaid, and other health care are slightly more, by the Cato Institute's reckoning. National defense is about 13 percent, as is income security, with interest on federal debt right behind. DOGE faces quite an uphill battle to succeed in its mission to slash the size and cost of federal government.
DOGE faces obstacles from Democrats who recognize that the government is corrupt and inefficient but want more of it anyway. It also faces a challenge in Republicans and independents who say they want less government but don't want to surrender their favorite boondoggles.
Americans are lukewarm about DOGE because they're torn about its mission. Sure, they have a low opinion of the federal government, but they might be willing to put up with its deep flaws so long as it delivers their goodies.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
They are not lukewarm about any of the attendant issues so I don't see your point.
1) The public debt
2) Huge amounts of money going to climate change, Ukraine, Student Load forgiveness
3) High taxes
4)high cost of gas , food, housing.
seems the only logical conclusion from your article is, THey greatly support DOGE but don't make the connections.
What goodies is it delivering?that is an odd statement.THey aren't stupid. They see, to take a couple of CA examples
1) The goodies of pensions are KILLING ordinary citizens
Report: At $1.5 trillion, California has nation's largest public pension debt load
2) California's high-speed rail project. The president said the $135 billion project has “the worst overruns” in U.S. history.
3) Feb 3, 2025 — The US Army Corps of Engineers opened two dams on Friday in Central California and let roughly 2.2 billion gallons of water flow out of reservoirs.
4) CATO INSTITUTE : Yes, California’s Fast-Food Minimum Wage Law Has Killed Thousands of Jobs
4 reasons Gavin Newsom's new fast food law is a recipe for disaster
The bill may have harmful consequences for the fast food industry, its workers, and its consumers
That tribalism likely extends to cutting government as well...
When was the last time somebody, form either party cut government?
You mean in the last month or before that?
Before that. Maybe Clinton.
Before that.
ThatsTheJoke.gif
Maybe I should've written, "[Checks watch] You want that in days or hours?"
Majorities of partisans of both parties as well as of independents want more federal spending on Social Security, Education, and Medicare, according to A.P.-NORC. A majority of Democrats also want more to be spent on Medicaid and assistance to the poor, while a majority of Republicans similarly want more dedicated to border security and the military.
Guess which of these things is mandated by the constitution.
123% Debt to GDP ratio is unsustainable. This should be included in every article, blog, tweet or smoke signal discussing DOGE/spending cuts. And taxation cannot get it done without killing off all growth and productivity which is needed to increase tax revenues.
Everyone is mad when their ox gets gored. Everyone hates Congress, except for *their* representatives. Tax that guy, don't tax me! Etc.
I want all of the oxen gored. And the fat, useless oxen should be culled completely.
"Americans are lukewarm about DOGE because they're torn about its mission."
My observation differs a bit, in that it seems like more people appreciate what DOGE is attempting to do, but are squishy about how DOGE is going about it. Ripping the band-aid off makes them squeamish, they'd but they'd be fine if it falls off on its own. Trump and Musk are brash and rude, they'd prefer things to be done in a more 'civilized' fashion.
If you question how something is being done then you don't want it to be done at all. At least that's what the Trump defending True Libertarians told me.
You'd bitch about anything Trump does and any matter he does it.
Thank you for showing off the fact that you attack anyone who questions your political messiah. Get some real religion instead of worshiping a gameshow host.
anyone who questions your political messiah
Says the drunk retard who who thinks anyone that doesn't agree with him worships Trump.
Any new CPS incidents to report?
I thought he was referencing a proven track record.
Not even a mention about the big megaphones that state propagandists have and are using to undermine and misinform the public about these cuts.
Well that would muddy the waters and make the Democrats the obvious bad guy. We can't have that. It's boffsidez or nothing.
LOL @ Polls.
Indeed.
+1
It's funny that in 'social media bubble', 'two movies, one screen', 'lawfare/indict a ham sandwich', 'Dewey *and* HRC Elected President!' America "journalists" continue to cite polls like it's a measure of anything other than how hard or how loud their audience will laugh when they punch themselves in the dick.
The dude won, twice, *overtly* on the failure of the polls and the dishonesty of the media. TooSilly might as well be citing bubblegum wrappers and cereal box tops as to the degree of DOGE's popularity.
I was intrigued by comments made by Kevin O'Leary: “There’s this concept in private equity, when you get a bankrupt company and you go in there, you cut 20 percent more than your initial read, and then you find, like a pool of mercury, the organization gels back together again.” “Always cut deeper, harder when there’s fat and waste,” he added.
There was something in one article I read, I thought it was the O'Leary comments one, but I don't find it. Paraphrasing: If you don't accidentally cut something important, you weren't cutting deep enough. It's simple enough to recall critical performers if they get caught up in the wash.
From what I've been reading many, many Americans approve of the work DOGE is doing. In fact a certain Latin American leader also approves.
Javier Milei gives Elon Musk a golden chainsaw.: https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1892705707264266601
Let's clarify. Republicans, conservatives, and most non-Democrats say our government is corrupt and inefficient. Liberals are unhappy with any challenges to their leviathan and don't like DOGE.
Bingo. The lead is painfully stupid and completely at odds with all of the findings in the article.
"Democrats seem willing to tolerate a lot to get a larger government, but Republicans aren’t much better."
"Republicans have overwhelmingly favored a smaller government providing fewer services since polling on the issue began in 1976... Democratic support for larger, more active government grew from 49 percent in 1976 to 74 percent now."
So.... One party's voters overwhelmingly favor smaller government, while the other party's voters increasingly think government isn't big enough. But they're about the same? Okay, JD. I look forward to next week's article on your ass and a hole in the ground and how there's really no difference.
It needs to be repeatedly said that a material amount of government spending is new and was put into place by exploiting the pandemic. The swamp played dirty to put it into place. I couldn't care less if Trump and Musk play dirty removing it.
Social Security and Medicare aren’t the unique “goodies” favored by Republicans. They’re likely the only aspects of government favored across party lines; important to consider when deciding what to leave in and what to leave out. Meanwhile our defense spending remains greater than every other developed country combined.
And, TBH, the only reason I somewhat care about social security and medicare are because I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
I see two issues at work. First is the conundrum (I know there's a proper name for it) where one views an institution postively/negatively and views the individuals oppositely. I know I feel that way about my university. I love the institution, but seems everything they do pisses me off. People know gov't by design is lousy at providing services, but continue to expect them to do it.
Second, is DOGE's medium of communication (posts on X with lots of !!!!), coupled with zero follow up or response to critics. The SS# thing is the poster child. They're technically correct about the people on the rolls, but wildly exaggerate the fraudulent payments (for which they have no proof there is any). Now, surely SS has lots of fraud and this may be a source, but they cut themselves off at the knees by giving half-truths.
Top it off with this assinine concept of rebates questions whether they're really serious people or just enjoying their long 15 minutes.
There is so much projection here it is laughable.
“”libertarian” Reasonistas say government is corrupt and wasteful but are torn by DOGE actually doing anything”
Excellent comment. It's because these soy boys here at Reason.com are unhappy Progressive Collectivists not Libertarians.
Another Collectivist essay here at Irrational.com.
There are more than a few of us Americans who would be supportive of DOGE if they were doing things legally and constitutionally. Don't forget about us.
Perhaps you could provide us with two or three examples? And don't say "some circuit judge said so", because they have no authority to interfere.
Yes, forget about lying piles of TDS-addled shit.
I guess when you mix "absolutely stoked" with "big mad" you get "lukewarm"?
I get schadenfreude from the "big mad", so I'm enjoying the show.
Tuccille is a steaming pile of TDS-addled shit who needs to get reamed with a barb-wire-wrapped broomstick and then fuck off and die.
Democrats are willing to spend unlimited amounts of other people's money. They have a sense that a large share of other people's money isn't rightly those other people's anyway.
It's obvious the democrats are in on the grift. How much was Slapsey Maxey Waters getting in kickbacks? AOC? The Turtle?
Way too much money floating around and some of it obviously made its way back to certain members of Congress.
Everyday now the revelations as to how much of the taxpayer's money went to fund LGBTQ crap in some Asian state or to fund sex change operations in Backwardistan or other useless shite, where most of it was stolen anyway.
Just like dementia Joe's $50 billion high speed internet fraud. Did he get his 10%?
This is the kind of "well it's obvious" comment a lot of the public has, but it's more heat than light, because unless you connect the dots, there's no picture.
The Republicans are right to prefer a smaller state. It seems they're unwilling to pay even for the size they do want, however.
"want more federal spending on Social Security, Education, and Medicare"
This is not necessarily inconsistent. If they agree about more Social Security and Medicare spending but disagree about what to cut in order to pay for them, then cutting EVERYTHING else would achieve that. If Social Security and Medicare represent 50% of federal spending and defense is about 15% then you could cut out 35% of all other spending, increase spending in the two favored programs and STILL decrease deficit spending.
No shit, people are on board with spending cuts as long as it's not their ox that is gored.
Right - cause we've seen how accurate polling has been in recent presidential elections. (sarc)
This article is an unserious attempt to discredit a grassroots movement to put our country back on solid financial footing. (not sarc)
Summary....
Republicans want a *Constitutional* US Government as-in one that does national defense.
Democrats want an *UN-Constitutional* [Na]tional So[zi]alist Empire.
Or even simpler.
Democrats want to destroy the USA.
Republicans just want a USA.
Oh... And 75% of Democrats think the US isn't Nazi enough yet.
Democratic support for larger, more active government grew from 49 percent in 1976 to 74 percent now.
If you give a mouse a cookie.
This is a Rhetoric trick. A family gets wiped out by Tren de Aragua and those closest have exterme opinions. Somebody frames a general question "Shold Trump curtail immigratino in view of there being some criminals among entrants to our country" -- leaving out Tren de Aragua. Then someone writes an article saying some people like those closest to the family have strong opinions but most American have far more reserve on the issue" TOTALLY FALSE
I SEE HUGE SUPPORT FOR DOGE.
The argument for years was big government vs small government, but it now appears to have switched from my big government vs your big government and that may well be the reason for the reluctance to support DOGE. I have long argued that goal should not be big vs small government but rather seeking smart government. Smart government recognizes that some government is necessary, but it should be as small as possible. The simple rule starts
- do we have a problem?
- If yes, can it be solved but private means?
- If yes, it's not the governments' problem.
- If no, the government must address the problem.
...or
Does the US Constitution even grant "Union of States" authority to address the issue.
The USA is a "Union of States" not a "Union of people".
The USA has a definition.
There will never be a USA when everyone wants to re-define its definition.
Minarchism is a "classic" branch of libertarianism. It finds proponents from both the left and the right wing, therefore you will also get detractors from both the left and the right wing.
It is non-controversial among actual libertarians, but among the crypto-statists (left or right) here in the commentariat you will get pushback.
But here's where you are confused, your definition of "smart Gov't" is letter for letter the same as minarchism, and minarchism is by definition small gov't. So your post comes off as disingenuous doublespeak.
First thanks for the introduction to the idea of Minarchism. I think the idea of a nightwatchman government well describes what many people would like to see. A government that serves the people but does it more in the background. A person doesn't think about the government but wakes up after a snowstorm and expect the roads to be ploughed so they can go to work. I would agree that a smart government would be smaller than the big government envisioned by the left and increasingly envisioned more by the right, but I also suspect it might be larger than some "small government" advocates envision. For example, Libertarians often speak of accepting government safety nets for those that really need them but seem to believe that the really needy don't exist.
LMAO.... Cause that's what bankrupted and corrupted the USA.
Plowing RRRRROOOOOAAAAADDDDZZZZ!!! /s
Any excuse... Any excuse no matter how insignificant for a [Na]tional So[zi]alist Empire. You really want to pull the RRROOOAAADDZZZ card? Even snow-removal works better privatized.
You want 'smarter'? Well there it is... 'Private Market' *is* smarter.
...because only 'stupid' believes 'Guns' can make/do things.
And the 'Gun' threat is the only tool that separates Government from any other run-of-the-mill business. As such governments only humanitarian asset is to ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for all.
Americans Say Government Is Corrupt and Inefficient but Are Lukewarm About DOGE
What explains the lack of urgency regarding the debt bomb? The Normalcy Fallacy might explain a lot. Many people are simply convinced that nothing bad can happen, and so they ignore the danger and continue with the silly partisan games.
Trump attempts to reduce waste and corruption, and REASON cries, "The sky is falling, the sky is falling!" (With the exception of intelligent Reason contributors such as JDT.)
Musk subscribes the tech bro ethos of ‘move fast and break things’. If a couple of rockets crash, well back to the drawing board. When some teenaged tech bro who is usually playing Fortnite or trash-posting on Discord is poking around in tax records people get concerned.
It may not be fair, but there is an image that government auditors with access to confidential information are 40 year old accountants who have had extensive background checks, not kids with backpacks and a bs in software engineering.
This just in: the American taxpayers just gave their approval of DOGE by a whopping 72%!!
The democrats, not so much.
11/57 Grey box breakdown.
TJJ2000
sarcasmic
SpiritusMundi
Moderation4ever
AT
TJJ2000 & sarcasmic had about equal comments.