Want government to work better? Then have it do fewer things.

Last month, President Joseph Biden announced new tariffs on steel, aluminum, semiconductors, electric vehicles and other items. His administration Assert The measures are in retaliation for “China’s unfair trade practices” and are intended to “protect American workers and businesses.”

Cynics argue Biden is trying to appeal to voters who were thinking of voting for Donald Trump, who has repeatedly criticized China for bad trade deals over the years. Whatever Biden’s motivations, it’s likely that the Chinese government will Record of misconductThese include theft of intellectual property, selling illegal goods, forced labor, and theft of confidential technology.

Meanwhile, in Congress, lawmakers Discuss Whether to extend the 2017 tax cuts that expire in 18 months. President Trump, who signed the bill, There was a big fuss “This is the largest tax cut and reform in the history of our country. In fact, it’s bigger than President Reagan’s tax cut and reform many years ago.”

He argued that the legislation would boost the economy and enrich Americans. Critics argued that the legislation disproportionately benefits the wealthiest Americans and corporations. Extending these tax cuts would: $4 trillion The federal budget deficit is already at an alarmingly high level.

Whatever one thinks about tariffs and tax extensions as public policy, it is worth recognizing that the self-interested groups that benefit from these temporary policies support them and want them to become permanent.

“So what?” you may be thinking. “That’s how the system works.”

That is absolutely true. First Amendment The law protects the right of Americans to “petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Americans can lobby Congress, and if that doesn’t work, they can submit petitions to executive agencies, file lawsuits in federal court, and campaign to elect officials who will do their bidding.

But ask yourself: What would happen to government if organized interests relentlessly demanded the creation of new benefits and the preservation of old programs? Answer: Government would be overloaded, distracted, and unable to focus resources on the most pressing problems.

Governance degenerates into spending taxpayer money on redundant, inefficient programs that don’t create wealth but transfer existing wealth to stakeholders. Citizens lose trust and become angry.

This is “demosclerosis,” a symptom endemic to our free society, which the authors identify as follows: Jonathan Rauch Thirty years ago, he was brilliant. Book of the same name.

It’s hard to underestimate the scale of this problem. Last month, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said: 112 new instances Fragmentation, duplication, and overlap of federal programs. This is 100 Recommendations A GAO investigation last year 1,800 other recommendations This is the first time since 2011.

Needless to say, these reports do not take into account the various government actions, such as tariffs, that drive up prices paid by Americans. They also do not consider the costs of the enormous, arcane U.S. tax code, which creates contradictory financial incentives for Americans and private businesses and imposes high compliance costs in the form of legions of accountants and lawyers. And the GAO reports do not mention the various government actions that are already funded by private sector efforts.

It’s tempting to raise your fist in anger at Washington, D.C., and blame special interests. But that’s misguided, Rauch says. Nearly every American is the recipient of some kind of subsidy or government program. “We’ve all encountered special interests,” he says. “And they’re us.”

There is no cure for dementia, but it is not necessarily incurable. Voters can elect more lawmakers who promise to cut specific programs. Vague promises are not enough.

Moreover, Congress itself could appoint a committee to publicly identify ineffective, redundant, and unnecessary policies and programs, and then compile them into one large bill and vote on it. The same could be done for cuts and harmonization of policies and programs. 186,000 pages of regulatory documentsAnd each year, the president can submit to Congress a “repeal list” of programs and regulations that Congress can vote on.

Doing any or all of these things would be the responsible thing to do, but Rauch points out that they also give agencies the freedom to experiment with new solutions to existing problems — money that would have been wasted would actually produce results, pay down debt, and be returned to taxpayers.

Kevin R. Kosar (Kevin Kosar) is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute andUnderstanding ParliamentPodcasting and Editing Understanding Congress.org.