Public Confidence in Federal Information Plummets Ahead of Midterm Elections, Survey Shows

Public confidence in the accuracy and neutrality of federal government information has declined significantly over recent years, leaving a majority of Americans deeply skeptical about official statements on key national issues. According to new survey data, substantial portions of the electorate now place minimal or no trust in communications from the federal government regarding elections, politics, environmental matters, and foreign policy.

The findings, released by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research in collaboration with USAFacts, illustrate a notable deterioration of institutional trust. When questioned across a broad range of public policy domains, roughly six in ten U.S. adults reported low confidence in official federal communications. Most respondents stated that they trust government information on topics including immigration, abortion, foreign affairs, the environment, and political matters "only a little" or "not at all."

This erosion of public trust represents a clear shift from recent benchmarks. Skepticism toward government data and official announcements has risen steadily since 2024 and has reached levels higher than those documented toward the conclusion of President Donald Trump’s first term in office. The growing doubt reflects shifting perceptions across the country, with declining faith in executive branch communications emerging as a defining trend.

The survey also revealed that public trust in federal data has grown increasingly polarized along partisan lines since Trump’s initial presidency. While skepticism was previously distributed across different political factions, the steep drop in institutional confidence has been particularly pronounced among Democrats, who express mounting alarm over how information is produced, managed, and disseminated by the current administration.

Much of this erosion coincides with a turbulent year and a half across the federal bureaucracy. Since beginning his second term, Trump has initiated extensive efforts to reshape and dismantle significant segments of the executive branch. These moves have included aggressive measures to terminate longstanding government initiatives, close down entire federal agencies, and reduce thousands of civil service positions, altering the operational landscape of the federal workforce.

The public's growing doubt spans nearly every topic analyzed in the AP-NORC and USAFacts research when compared to baseline data collected in 2019. Distrust has intensified across multiple sectors, with education serving as a prominent example. In 2019, approximately 37% of respondents reported low trust in federal information regarding education, but that figure has now escalated to 53%, driven by a sharp nine-percentage-point increase within the past year alone.

Similar declines in credibility were recorded on other fundamental topics, demonstrating an expansive public retreat from relying on federal agencies as objective arbiters of facts. Whether the subject involves diplomatic affairs, environmental regulations, border policies, or reproductive healthcare, majorities of the public increasingly view federal releases through a lens of skepticism.

This atmosphere of mistrust was reflected in the reactions of survey respondents who pointed to politicization within federal agencies. Shannon Ingram, a 46-year-old Democrat residing in Maryland, voiced frustration with the reliability of official messaging. Ingram highlighted inconsistent and shifting public health guidelines as a prime example of questionable communications since Trump returned to the White House, arguing that bias from authors at the top has tainted the integrity of the content.

Such skepticism extends into critical health and scientific domains. The administration's broader policy shifts—including high-profile executive actions regarding vaccine policy and reshuffling at health-focused departments under cabinet leadership—have fueled debate among voters regarding the scientific objectivity of agency guidance.

Doubt has also cast a significant shadow over the administration of American democracy itself as the upcoming midterm elections approach. The survey found that only 34% of U.S. adults maintain "a great deal" or "quite a bit" of trust in the government’s certification of election tallies. This represents a downward slide from the 40% of Americans who expressed high confidence in the process during the 2024 election cycle.

The process of election certification has traditionally served as a standard administrative routine, with local and state election authorities formally verifying vote totals following ballots being cast. However, the procedure has increasingly transformed into a contentious partisan issue following disputes and widespread challenges that emerged after Trump’s defeat in the 2020 presidential race.

Lingering disputes over election administration have spurred ongoing friction between the federal government and state-level officials. Unilateral executive orders attempting to overhaul nationwide voting procedures have triggered pushback and legal challenges from state attorneys general and secretaries of state seeking to protect local election authority against federal intervention.

At the same time, sweeping reorganizations across key energy and environmental agencies have drawn public attention to the changing priorities of federal governance. Cabinet officials leading departments responsible for public lands, energy resources, and environmental protection have enacted widespread administrative changes that have polarized public attitudes regarding official regulatory findings and conservation metrics.

The widespread decline in institutional confidence carries profound implications for governance as the midterm cycle intensifies. With majorities questioning the veracity of official facts and doubting the routine mechanisms of election certification, federal leaders face a steep challenge in bridging the informational divide within an increasingly fractured and suspicious electorate.