(TNND) — Millions of federal government workers face a big decision by Thursday.

They’ve been offered a buyout by President Donald Trump, who is intent on cutting the federal bureaucracy.

The U.S. is about $36 trillion in debt.

But the buyouts might not be the most impactful way to reduce government spending.

“It's a drop in a bucket, especially when you're talking about increasing spending in other areas,” said Tad DeHaven, an analyst on federal and state economic and fiscal policy issues for the Cato Institute.

DeHaven is an advocate for spending cuts.

“But if that's all that gets done, then that's not changing anything about our trajectory,” he said Wednesday about Trump’s efforts to trim the federal workforce. “It's not really downsizing government.”

There are just over 3 million federal government employees, not counting the military, according to the Pew Research Center.

Trump’s buyout offer, officially called a deferred resignation program, was extended to most full-time federal employees with some exclusions, such as military troops and Postal Service workers.

Not counting the military and Postal Service, the government spent about $384 billion last year on its federal civilian workforce.

The federal budget was $6.75 trillion.

Federal civilian employees accounted for less than 6% of total government spending last year.

RELATED STORY: 'We're ranked very badly': Trump wants to shut down DOE, says states should lead schools

And, of course, the entire federal civilian workforce isn’t going to take the buyout offer.

DeHaven said the focus should be on the programs and agencies, not employees.

“If you eliminate programs and agencies, then you don't need as many employees,” he said.

RELATED STORY: Tax cuts, debt limit, spending caps: Congress faces key fiscal choices this year

Another expert noted that civil servants implement policy, they don’t make it. And she said reducing the workforce through buyouts “could backfire on Trump” if that results in all the same government programs just not working as well.

Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow in governance studies and the director of the Center for Effective Public Management at Brookings, used the example of air traffic controllers for her recent article.

“There is no Republican or MAGA way to land an airplane,” she wrote.

But losing air traffic controllers might just lead to flying disruptions and a lot of angry American travelers.

“Pushing federal workers out of the government with no plan for how government services will function is a recipe for disaster,” Kamarck wrote.

She also said there are legal questions about Trump’s buyout plan.

The federal government has congressionally approved buyout authority that’s capped at $25,000.

Trump’s plan allows workers who resign before Thursday to keep getting paid through September.

Kamarck said the average federal worker would hit the $25,000 limit allowed for buyouts within a few months.

The Trump administration sought to work around that problem by asking workers to go on “administrative leave” for eight months, but the courts may determine that there really is no legal distinction between “administrative leave” and a buyout, Kamarck wrote.

DeHaven also questioned if the government would be forced to turn to more contractors if it finds itself understaffed in some departments.

DeHaven said the buyouts fit Trump's governing style.

He said they also fit with how Elon Musk operates.

Musk, tasked by Trump with the new Department of Government Efficiency, famously cut X’s workforce after he acquired the then-named Twitter.

“In the sense that if you think of the federal government as like a private business, then I understand that. But the federal government's not a private business,” DeHaven said.

He said it’s a “disservice to the American people” to pretend like the nation’s fiscal problems can be solved with getting rid of some government employees.

The government has to address entitlements, DeHaven said.

That would mean cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and more.

“My ideal scenario for DOGE coming into this was a thoughtful review,” DeHaven said. “You take the materials that are out there. You take the things that the Cato Institute sent. Then you start working with the relevant committees in Congress to pursue legislation, whether it's through reconciliation, whatever. But you get people on board.”

Cato, a libertarian-leaning think tank, published a detailed, 23-chapter report intended to help Trump, Congress and DOGE cut the size of the federal government.

The Congressional Budget Office projects the federal deficit to be $1.9 trillion this year, adding to the roughly $36 trillion debt.

Discretionary spending only accounts for about a quarter of the federal budget.

Mandatory spending and the interest the government pays on its mounting debt account for the rest.

Until 2010, workers paid more in Social Security taxes than what the federal government paid out in benefits, another Cato expert, Romina Boccia, recently told The National News Desk.

Since then, Social Security has borrowed over $1 trillion to bridge the gap.

And the government is expected to borrow another $4 trillion to make up the Social Security deficit between now and 2033.

Serious cuts to popular programs, not buyouts of bureaucrats, will make the difference for America’s fiscal future, DeHaven said.

But he said Trump doesn’t want to touch Social Security or Medicare.

“Don't pretend like you're seriously addressing this 800-pound gorilla in the room by taking away some of the peanuts that you feed the beast,” he said.