Reforming federal agencies: Reagan’s vision to Trump’s promises
This piece was originally written as a contribution for the Thomson Reuters Institute.
Public trust in many of federal government agencies is on the decline, across political, generational and racial lines. Indeed, most Americans remain divided on whether the federal government does too much or too little to solve problems, with widespread skepticism about the efficiency and competency of many federal agencies.
In 2024, the federal government was rated as the second-lowest industry sector between the oil and gas and pharmaceutical industries.
As he is about to begin his second term, President-elect Donald Trump and advisors including Elon Musk have promised sweeping changes to the way the federal government works — changes, not surprisingly, that will focus on how various agencies operate. Musk has been teamed with former Republican presidential candidate and pharmaceutical entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a commission aimed at reducing federal spending by $2 trillion annually and decreasing the workforce of federal agencies by 75%.
As state and local governments anticipate the ripple effect of changes at the federal level, this mirrors historic efforts under the Reagan and Clinton Presidential Administrations to deliver greater government efficiency — to a much larger and potentially more impactful degree, of course.
“Draining the swamp”: A Reagan-era rallying cry revisited
While many credit President Trump with popularizing the rallying cry to “drain the swamp”, the phrase was used in 1982 by then-President Ronald Reagan, as he was initiating his own efforts to improve government agency efficiency and downsize the federal government. President Reagan formed the President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost Control in the Federal Government under CEO J. Peter Grace, an effort more commonly recalled as The Grace Commission.
This was a federally scaled version of Reagan’s Survey on Efficiency and Cost Control which was executed during his tenure as governor of the State of California. The Grace Commission was privately funded and brought together more than 150 corporate leaders to review agencies and functions within the federal government. Many of the Grace Commission’s recommendations would require legislative buy-in, which prevented a large number of them from ever being implemented.
A similar approach to government efficiency was brought forth during the Clinton Administration in 1993, the National Partnership for Reinventing Government, a program championed by then-Vice President Al Gore. This time, advice came from inside experts — longtime federal employees who had a keen sense of opportunities for efficiency and customer service improvements. Realizing the roadblocks which Congress could pose, the program tried to focus primarily on administrative changes which could be made without lawmakers’ approval.
The partnership brought forth plain-English documents and improved customer service, while offering less onerous regulations and downsizing agencies and workforce numbers to record post-Cold War levels.
Reform or reduction: Differing visions for DOGE.
While DOGE is not an official federal department and will likely be set up as a Federal Advisory Committee (similar to how the Grace Commission was established), it will be able to make recommendations, subject to public transparency laws. However, DOGE will need to rely on Congress to implement said recommendations. Constitutionally, only Congress holds the power to authorize and fund new agencies, and they can choose to take or dismiss feedback from commissions as it relates to the federal budget.
While Musk and Ramaswamy have pledged that they will not be paid for their roles as co-leaders of DOGE, if they are formal employees (unpaid or otherwise), they would be classified as Special Government Employees and would have to file financial disclosures and be subjected to federal employee conflict of interest penalties. Musk and his companies (including X, SpaceX, and Tesla) may face further scrutiny because of his DOGE role as those entities are slated to receive $3 billion dollars in federal contracts and still face ongoing federal investigations.
Ramaswamy has publicly advocated for a major reduction in the size of the federal workforce, but mass layoffs (or reductions in force, as they are called), aren’t an easy undertaking. Employees have the ability to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board, and because of the Constitutionally granted Congressional authorities, eventually Congress must authorize some of these decisions.
President-elect Trump has promised that cuts will “not impact day-to-day life for Americans” or impact Social Security, or Department of Defense spending. Of course, it remains unclear if the goal of DOGE is truly to reduce federal agency services and the size of the federal government, or if it is to balance the federal budget through bipartisan consensus on spending priorities. Both appear, at first blush, to be roles best suited to Congress.
Unique to this administration, legislative caucuses have been formed in both the House of Representatives and Senate, under the same acronym DOGE, but in this case which stands for Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency. Caucus members have shared personal goals of reducing the national debt; managing fraud, waste & abuse within the federal government; and to root out wasteful spending (often called pork busting.)
This effort to mirror an Executive Advisory Committee with bicameral legislative caucuses may make Congressional implementation of committee recommendations more feasible than prior administrations found. DOGE is scheduled to be sunset in July 2026, compelling it to focus on short-term Executive actions and rely on lawmakers for longer-term support.
This Time, Congress is in the Game
It is clear that the incoming Trump Administration has effectively gauged the public’s sentiment around the effectiveness of federal government agencies and the government in general. To rebuild public trust in these institutions, there are three approaches which need to be generated from within the federal government and brought forward through government agencies:
Rebuilding trust with the public
It is clear that the Trump Administration has effectively gauged the public’s sentiment around the effectiveness of the federal government. To rebuild public trust there are three approaches which be generated from within the federal government:
Humanize civil servants — Are there ways to feature or call out the individuals who work within the federal government to make it less of a faceless bureaucracy? Of the more than 2 million federal employees, 80% work outside the Washington, DC metro area and are in non-political roles. Americans actually hold more belief in the competency of non-partisan civil servants.
Continuously improve user experience — Musk has advocated radical transparency under DOGE, encouraging the public to submit their suggestions for wasteful areas to target, and the House DOGE Caucus also has opened up a suggestion email box. Encouraging direct public engagement from citizens could work toward rebuilding trust. Technological improvements which also could improve customers’ experience with federal agencies may also address accusations of inefficiency.
Strengthening oversight — Empower agencies’ Offices of Inspectors General to continue to detect and prevent fraud, waste & abuse. Heightened levels of transparency with the public through portals like Oversight.gov, risk-based screening tools for federal funding, and generally increasing awareness of Inspectors General work can begin to address accusations of waste.
As the new presidential administration makes ambitious promises of government efficiency, the success of DOGE will depend on balancing bold promises and the limitations of implementation within the executive branch. Based on the successes and challenges of the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, public trust in the federal government may increase with a greater focus on transparency, improved user experience and empowering non-political civil servants.
