Is 1…e6 against 1. d4 a viable option?

Yes, it is a viable option. Bronstein played it in his World Championship Match against Botvinnik.
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1032201

For a French player it is the ideal first move. That being said, why the Dutch and not NID, QGD, or Semi-Slav?

Have you looked at playing the Tarrasch defense. It has the same beginning pawn structure as the French against White's 1.d4 and 2.c4

It's a great option but I generally prefer to move into the English Defense / QID over the dutch. As much as I've tried to love the dutch, even the more modest forms of it, it just never has lived up to my dreams.
Though the nimzo is a great opening I personally avoid the main line of it for the same reasons as I avoid the Ruy Lopez - the number of variations explodes and it's so commonly played that you'll need to know tons of theory to keep up. English defense is played in ~1% of games and struggles over e4 much earlier, so it's more forcing, can transpose into the duchampe variation of the nimzo or the mainline QID. Or certain lines of the dutch, but I usually avoid them.

This is precisely what I do over the board, and I am over 2000, so clearly it is viable, provided the Dutch you play is Classical or Stonewall (I play both) and not the Leningrad.

Because the Dutch rocks!

Yes, pairing the French with the Dutch is a good combination of defences for that reason. With 1. d4 e6, a Dutch player can avoid some lines in the Dutch, like the Staunton Gambit, by switching to the French after 2. e4 ... etc. GM Simon Williams (GingerGM) plays the classical Dutch and the French for this reason, so you may find some of his content useful.

Thanks I’ll makes sure to check it out, is there a specific YouTube video or should I just look at his games?

Hi,
I don't think he has a video specifically on this, but he has a number of videos doing speed runs, or his Titled Tuesday games, where he is commenting out loud on his thinking during move choices. Because the Classical Dutch is his main defence against 1. d4 ..., he does occasionally comment as to why he replies 1. d4 e6 ..., rather than 1. d4 f5 and mentions how he will switch to the French after 1. d4 e6 2. e4 ... So, just search for GingerGM on youtube and you should find his channel, and you'll find lots of content. You may have to search around through them to find examples related to this particular idea, but he plays the Dutch a lot so it shouldn't take too long (he almost always plays the Classical rather than the Stonewall or Leningrad, but that's not so important with what you're looking for).
Simon likes to play a variety of dubious lines in his videos because he enjoys complicated attacking positions, and some of his "catch phrases" are things like "Who cares about pawns?" when he decides to give up a pawn in order to get an interesting position (even if he's not entirely sure if his attacking idea is sound, if it looks "fun" he will generally got for it).
Also, his language can get a bit ... colourful, but if that doesn't bother you, he is very entertaining and instructional, using quite casual language at times which makes understanding what he's getting at easier to digest.

If you reach the exact same position with just a different move order then why wouldnt it be viable ?!?!?

I'm a french player that players the modern Benoni against d4. It starts off different from the French, but often ends up with a similar pawn structure against the London, which seems like what most common d4 opening. Doing this from memory and white may play different but something like this (and the main line Benoni if White knows and wants that) is what I usually get.

Edit: d5 here is worse than Qa5 because I made a bad move for white, but assuming white is more careful with the bishop you usually get a french like pawn structure.