Both major presidential candidates, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, have leaned towards protectionism, a stance recently echoed by Terry Schilling in The American Conservative. Unfortunately, this perspective misses the mark.

Protectionism is not the solution to revitalize American manufacturing or the economy. The real culprits are flawed internal policies — excessive government spending, high taxes, and stringent regulations — that stifle growth and innovation.

Politicians from both sides of the aisle often scapegoat countries like China and Mexico for the decline in US manufacturing. This narrative overlooks reality.

Technological advancements and productivity gains are the primary drivers of change in manufacturing, and that’s a good thing for the many beneficiaries at the expense of the few. Industrial production in manufacturing has remained relatively flat, indicating stable output despite economic fluctuations, while manufacturing employment has declined significantly, reflecting the sector’s increased productivity and automation.

In short, we don’t need as many hard jobs to provide the same output, and those displaced individuals can find better avenues to flourish, even with tough transitions. While it would be great if there were a way to protect everyone’s job, this is a fool’s errand resulting in control by politicians and bureaucrats in government at the expense of everyone else.

Free-market capitalism is needed now more than ever, not big-government socialism, which is already sending us down the road to serfdom. American manufacturing’s decline is largely due to domestic policies that reject free-market capitalism, thereby hindering economic growth.

Progressive policies have led to excessive government spending, high taxes, and overregulation. The federal government is spending about 25 percent of GDP and running nearly $2 trillion deficits, including paying about $1 trillion in net interest payments annually, even with record-high tax collections. Add to this how the Competitive Enterprise Institute reports federal regulations cost the US economy $1.9 trillion annually, equivalent to 7 percent of GDP. Spending and regulations shackle about one-third of our economy, creating perverse incentives for businesses and workers to compete and innovate.

The Trump administration’s efforts to boost manufacturing through tariffs led to trade wars that aimed to bring jobs back to the US. These measures backfired, however, increasing costs for American businesses and consumers, as tariffs are just taxes on Americans. Manufacturing output saw little sustained improvement, and employment gains were modest and short-lived.

Deficit spending, which contributed to an appreciated currency from foreigners’ demand for the US dollar, made it cheaper to purchase foreign goods, exacerbating the trade deficit. The trade deficit expanded even after Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese goods. Similarly, the Biden administration’s attempts to revitalize the sector through initiatives like the American Jobs Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act have yet to do more than drive up the deficit and prop up specific markets.

Despite potentially good intentions, these policies have yet to deliver the promised results, often perpetuating the same issues of overregulation and high spending.

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaced NAFTA and mentioned in the piece, introduced more protectionist measures than its predecessor. The USMCA’s stringent labor and content rules have complicated trade and increased production costs, undermining its effectiveness in promoting free trade. These provisions counter what should have been done to promote more trade and prosperity.

It is wise to remember that free trade has provided the best opportunities for people to prosper and has significantly reduced extreme poverty globally, including in China.

America should not isolate itself from other countries, as we benefit from a growing global demand for our products and the supply of goods we can purchase from abroad. Consumers and producers in America are better off with more domestic and international trade. As we don’t want to produce everything we consume daily, trading with others is the most efficient way to meet our needs.

Our national debt, driven by excessive government spending, is a significant economic burden. This debt will continue to grow without the resolve to cut spending and implement a strong spending limit. The Federal Reserve’s monetary policy, which has reduced purchasing power and higher inflation, also impacts manufacturing and should be regulated through a monetary rule.

The PROVE IT Act aims to ensure that carbon emissions from imports are accurately measured. Still, the underlying assumption of a need to tax carbon dioxide — a necessary component of life — is flawed. Pigouvian taxes are problematic because they often target the wrong factors at incorrect tax rates, essentially serving as tools for government overreach rather than effective economic policy.

The focus should be on minimizing government control over economic actions, which create more problems. A carbon tax or one of its spinoffs is a misguided attempt to control what the EPA doesn’t consider a pollutant, leading to worse outcomes for everyone, especially the poor.

Another way to improve relationships with countries and put more collective pressure on China to liberalize while meeting the needs of consumers and producers in America would have been to approve a version of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

This trade agreement negotiated by the Obama administration allowed expanded free trade with 11 other Asia-Pacific countries (Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam). By partnering with multiple countries, America could have promoted free trade practices that fostered a more robust economic environment that competes with China, Russia, and other potential adversaries.

The TPP, as detailed by the Council on Foreign Relations, aims to enhance trade and economic integration across the Asia-Pacific region, providing significant benefits to all member nations. The TPP would reduce tariffs, establish common trade standards, and open new markets for American goods and services, ultimately leading to greater economic growth and job creation at home.

Unfortunately, Trump rejected the TPP when he took office in 2017 instead of trying to negotiate the TPP better. While America was left out, the other 11 countries joined trade agreements after TPP’s demise, a major setback for Americans that could have been avoided.

Revitalizing American manufacturing requires addressing internal policy failures rather than blaming foreign competition. We can ensure long-term prosperity by reducing government interference, embracing free trade, and fostering a competitive environment. The better path forward with fewer trade-offs lies in free-market principles, which have the power to drive innovation, efficiency, and economic growth.

It’s time to shift the focus from protectionism to fostering a robust, open market that benefits everyone.

This piece was produced for AIER.org, you can find the original here.