Recent survey results suggest a higher-than-anticipated approval among Americans for Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). A CNN analyst was noticeably surprised by the findings.
A CBS/YouGov poll discovered that 54% of Americans think that DOGE and Musk should have some influence on governmental operations and spending. This response comes despite protests and criticism from Democrats about DOGE’s federal spending cut strategies.
Harry Enten, a data reporter for CNN, was taken aback by these findings, stating on air, “This, to me, was one of the more shocking figures that I saw. It made me go, ‘wait a minute, hold on one second! Whoa!'”
The survey further revealed that a majority of Americans support President Donald Trump’s efforts to downsize government agency staff. Musk recently informed cabinet members that he expects DOGE to achieve its $1 trillion spending cut target.
When CNN’s Kate Bolduan asked Enten what Americans believe DOGE is cutting, Enten referred to additional survey data suggesting that the public perceives the cuts as targeting wasteful spending rather than essential services.
A poll conducted by The Washington Post and IPSOS found that 42% of registered voters believe DOGE is cutting “wasteful spending,” while only 36% believe the department is cutting “necessary programs.”
“Democrats want to argue that the type of spending that Musk is cutting is mainly necessary programs, but that comes in at just 36%. The wasteful spending actually wins the plurality here, at 42%,” Enten discussed on CNN.
However, not all surveys show extensive support for DOGE. According to PolitiFact, a Harvard-Harris poll found that while 72% support a government agency focused on efficiency, DOGE wasn’t explicitly mentioned. Other surveys have revealed mixed or negative public sentiments towards Musk’s involvement in the Trump administration, particularly regarding DOGE’s access to sensitive government information.
The CBS News/YouGov poll also showed that Americans are split on the impact of workforce reductions. Republicans perceive them as improving efficiency, while Democrats see them as removing crucial workers and consolidating Trump’s power.
Regarding federal workforce reductions specifically, 52% believe Musk and DOGE have too much influence, 15% think it’s insufficient, and 33% believe it’s just right. The Trump administration has justified the reductions, asserting that the president is only interested in having the best and most capable individuals willing to implement his America First agenda.
The Washington Post reports that DOGE, backed by Musk and his allies, has defended its efforts to downsize federal agencies by claiming to target fraud, waste, and abuse in government spending. This sentiment has been echoed by President Trump, who suggests significant “fraud” exists in programs like Social Security.
Nevertheless, independent watchdogs and analysts quoted by the Washington Post argue that Musk and Trump are making general claims of fraud to garner political backing for extensive spending cuts. While fraudulent spending does exist in government, much of what Musk and his allies label as “fraud” is simply a disagreement over the purpose or value of certain programs.
Notwithstanding President Trump’s overall low approval ratings on the economy, the positive polling results for Musk and DOGE suggest that many Americans are reacting favorably to specific initiatives aimed at reducing perceived governmental waste.
According to PennLive, the polling data signifies a considerable shift in public opinion about the role of government. Fifty-five percent of Americans now believe that the government is overreaching, an increase from 54% who thought it was doing too little in 2020. This evolving sentiment could explain why efforts to decrease government spending are finding favor among a majority of voters.
Despite the apparent public backing for DOGE’s mission, the public remains largely unclear about what programs might be affected by the trillion-dollar spending cut goal. Surveys indicate that Americans are divided on whether these cuts will benefit or harm government services.
