Return To Partnership Project
The Partnership Project – Your partner to save the planet.
EPC Resource Library

Environmental Polling Roundup – February 28, 2025

David Gold David Gold

Headlines

The Economist + YouGov – The plurality of Americans say that Trump’s budget and staff cuts have gone too far, and Americans are increasingly concerned about Musk’s conflicts of interest [Article, Topline, Crosstabs]

Data for Progress – Around two-thirds of voters are concerned about staffing cuts at the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service, with just one in ten believing that funding for national parks and forests should be cut [Release, Crosstabs]

Data for Progress – Voters know virtually nothing about carbon dioxide removal (CDR), but warm to it quickly when exposed to more information [Release, Crosstabs]

Key Takeaways

Public opinion is continuing to turn against Musk and DOGE. The Economist and YouGov’s week-to-week tracking finds that Musk is dropping further underwater (43% favorable / 50% unfavorable, with 41% viewing him “very” unfavorably) and Americans continue to say that they’d rather cut or eliminate DOGE itself than any of the agencies it’s targeting.

Additionally, two in five Americans (42%) now say that the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce the budget and staff of federal agencies have “gone too far” while only around one in six (17%) say that these efforts “haven’t gone far enough.” 

As advocates look to point out the excessive nature of recent funding cuts, national parks and forests are prime examples that resonate across audiences. Data for Progress finds that around three-quarters of voters have positive opinions of the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service, including more than seven in ten Republicans. Data for Progress and The Economist/YouGov also both find that only around one in ten voters believe that funding for the National Park Service should be cut. 

Of all the agencies that the Trump administration has now pitted itself against, the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service may be the most popular across party lines. Data for Progress finds that, even among Republicans, more say that funding for national parks and forests should be increased than decreased.

Good Data Points to Highlight

Full Roundup

The Economist + YouGov – The plurality of Americans say that Trump’s budget and staff cuts have gone too far, and Americans are increasingly concerned about Musk’s conflicts of interest [Article, Topline, Crosstabs]

Musk and DOGE are both unpopular. Musk’s favorability is now seven points underwater (43% favorable / 50% unfavorable), and voters are about twice as likely to view him very unfavorably (41%) than very favorably (21%).

The survey also asked about funding for DOGE as well as for eight government agencies that have been targeted for cuts, including the Department of Energy, National Park Service, National Science Foundation, and NASA. While 4% or fewer say that any of the agencies included in the survey should be eliminated, 29% say that DOGE itself should be eliminated. Altogether, 37% of Americans say that DOGE should either be reduced or eliminated while only 21% say that it should be expanded.

Americans want Musk to have far less influence in the administration. While the clear majority of Americans recognize that Musk has “a lot” of influence in the Trump administration (63%), only around one in six (16%) want him to have “a lot” of influence. 

Even among Republicans, only around three in ten (29%) want Musk to have a lot of influence.

Americans are increasingly concerned about Musk’s conflicts of interest. The Economist and YouGov find that 57% of Americans are at least “somewhat” concerned about Musk using DOGE to benefit his own companies and personal interests, an increase of five points since last week. 

The public also feels strongly about Musk’s self-dealing, with 42% saying that they are “very” concerned about Musk using DOGE to benefit himself.

The plurality of Americans say that cuts have gone too far. Around two in five (42%) say that the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce the budgets and staff of federal agencies have “gone too far,” while only around one in six (17%) say that these efforts haven’t gone far enough.

An additional one-quarter (24%) say that the cuts have been “about right.”

More than one-third of Americans say that they know someone who’s been impacted by recent government cuts, including one in five whose family has been affected. Government cuts and funding freezes are quickly becoming a personal issue for much of the public: The Economist and YouGov find that 37% of Americans know somebody who has been affected by recent cuts in government agencies and programs. This includes 8% who say that they’ve been affected directly and 10% who say that a family member has been affected.

There are some clear indications that partisanship is impacting people’s responses here, however. Democrats (58%) are about four times as likely as Republicans (15%) to say that they know someone who has been impacted by the cuts. Among independents, around two in five (39%) say that they know somebody who has been affected.

Data for Progress – Around two-thirds of voters are concerned about staffing cuts at the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service, with just one in ten believing that funding for national parks and forests should be cut [Release, Crosstabs]

The NPS and U.S. Forest Service are overwhelmingly popular across party lines. Voters have nearly universally positive opinions of the National Park Service (75% favorable / 6% unfavorable), with more than seven in ten Democrats (75%), independents (79%), and Republicans (72%) viewing the agency favorably.

The U.S. Forest Service is similarly well-liked (74% favorable / 7% unfavorable), and also earns positive ratings from more than seven in ten Democrats (72%), independents (75%), and Republicans (74%).

There is virtually no appetite for cutting funding for national parks and forests. Only one in ten voters (10%) say that the federal government should decrease funding for national parks and forests, compared to 30% who say that the government should increase their funding and 53% who say that funding for national parks and forests should stay the same.

There is notably no constituency of voters calling for cuts to parks and forests. Even among Republicans, more say that federal funding for national parks and forests should be increased (21%) than decreased (16%).

Voters are vaguely aware of recent staffing cuts at national parks and forests, though few are hearing much. Roughly one in five voters (19%) say that they’ve heard “a lot” about layoffs at the NPS and U.S. Forest Service. An additional 44% say that they’ve heard “a little” about these staffing cuts, while 37% say that they’ve heard “nothing at all” about the topic.

Around two-thirds of voters, including many Republicans, are concerned about recent staffing cuts after hearing about them. After reading that the NPS and U.S. Forest Service recently laid off more than 3,000 workers in an effort to cut spending, 66% of voters say that they’re at least “somewhat” concerned about these staffing cuts. This sentiment cuts across party lines, with 83% of Democrats, 69% of independents, and 49% of Republicans expressing concern about the cuts to park and forest staff.

Data for Progress – Voters know virtually nothing about carbon dioxide removal (CDR), but warm to it quickly when exposed to more information [Release, Crosstabs]

Voters have heard little to nothing about carbon dioxide removal. Only 7% of voters say that they’ve heard “a lot” about carbon dioxide removal (CDR), while 31% say that they’ve heard “a little” about it and the majority (63%) say that they’ve heard nothing at all. 

Voters have instinctively positive reactions to the concept of CDR, which grow when they learn more about it. Among voters who have any familiarity with CDR (including all those who have heard at least “a little” about it), impressions of it are overwhelmingly positive (56% favorable / 16% unfavorable).

And after reading the description below, around two-thirds of voters (65% favorable / 15% unfavorable) – including majorities of Democrats (70% favorable), independents (66%), and Republicans (57%) – have favorable opinions of CDR.

“Carbon removal is the process of removing carbon from the atmosphere using technologies (like large filters) or approaches that help store more CO2 in soils and trees. 

Humans have burned fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas for electricity, heat, and transportation since the mid-1800s. Burning these fuels has released a significant amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide traps the sun’s heat and warms the Earth like a blanket. As human activities have increased, so has the layer of carbon dioxide pollution, leading to overall warmer temperatures and changes in the atmosphere that increase the likelihood of extreme weather.”

Voters across party lines support carbon removal projects in the U.S. and in their own states. The public is eager to see CDR implemented after learning about the concept.

Around three-quarters of voters support allowing CDR projects in the U.S. (76% support / 14% oppose) and in their own states (73% favorable / 17% unfavorable). At both the national and state levels, large majorities across party lines support allowing these projects.

The proposed Carbon Dioxide Removal Investment Act earns bipartisan support. After reading the description below, around two-thirds of voters (68% support / 19% oppose) – including majorities of Democrats (77% support), independents (68%), and Republicans (60%) – support the proposal.

“Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) refers to new technologies and practices that are able to remove existing carbon dioxide emissions from the atmosphere. Some lawmakers in Congress have proposed the bipartisan Carbon Dioxide Removal Investment Act to help encourage the development and construction of CDR technologies by establishing a new tax credit for CDR that would let groups that use CDR technology collect money per ton of carbon that is stored.”

Related Resources