Example Image
Civitas Outlook
Topic
Economic Dynamism
Published on
Apr 16, 2025
Contributors
Veronique de Rugy
(Shutterstock)

Trump Undermines His Growth Agenda for AI

Contributors
Veronique de Rugy
Veronique de Rugy
Veronique de Rugy
Summary
Leading in AI and helping workers requires the rejection of the economic fallacies of the populist left.
Summary
Leading in AI and helping workers requires the rejection of the economic fallacies of the populist left.

If Republicans are serious about making America the world’s leader in artificial intelligence, and if they truly want to lift workers, they must stop pirating economic policies from the left. The GOP’s ongoing realignment has led to a troubling embrace of protectionism, disturbing flirtations with higher taxes, and the use of class-war rhetoric that’s indistinguishable from progressive talking points.

The irony is that these policies don’t help workers; they hurt workers. And they won’t secure AI leadership; they’ll surrender it.

Many believe winning the AI race is not a symbolic goal but a strategic imperative. Without a thriving, innovation-first ecosystem, America cannot dominate in defense, biotech, advanced manufacturing, or cloud infrastructure. The authors of the recent Executive Order on Reducing the Anti-Competitive Regulatory Barriers seem to understand this point. That E.O. states that "Federal regulations should not predetermine economic winners and losers,” and it plans to remove "Regulations that reduce competition, entrepreneurship, and innovation—as well as the benefits they create for American consumers—should be eliminated."

However, an innovative ecosystem also relies on market-driven capital formation, fast scaling, and wide and ready access to inputs—all of which are undermined by the policies many Republicans now embrace.

Take tax policy. It’s no secret that Democrats have long proclaimed their desire to jack up taxes on the rich and corporations – on wealth and capital – without caring about the negative impact on investment and global competitiveness of the U.S. Until recently, Republicans took the opposite approach. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is a good example of that difference. It lowered the corporate tax rate to 21%, passed full R&D expensing, and introduced other pro-growth provisions. These reforms didn’t favor corporations for the sake of corporations. Instead, these reforms were meant to promote more innovation, higher wages, and better jobs.

Undoing these reforms, including raising taxes on corporations or even on top marginal income earners, as some Republicans are now talking about, would be a self-inflicted wound that Democrats would cheer. And the loudest cheers would come from that party’s left-most flank.

In addition, AI dominance won’t be won in a lab alone; it will be built on a foundation of massive computational power, which depends on abundant, affordable energy. Training large language models, powering data centers, running advanced simulations, and enabling autonomous systems require enormous amounts of electricity. Energy demand from AI and cloud computing is expected to skyrocket over the next decade. This reality means that America’s ability to lead in AI is inseparable from its ability to produce and distribute cheap, reliable energy at scale.

If implemented, the Trump administration's deregulatory agenda would be highly conducive to more energy abundance. However, the protectionist policies embraced by Trump and his populist allies directly and massively threaten this energy future. Tariffs on imported steel, aluminum, solar panels, and critical minerals raise energy infrastructure costs—everything from power lines and substations to wind turbines and battery storage. Add tariffs on other inputs, and you get a full-spectrum attack on the very supply chains needed to support advanced computing. This protectionism is economic self-sabotage disguised as patriotism.

Worse still, tariffs and economic chaos have broader geopolitical consequences. As Adam Thierer of R Street points out, “Trump’s trade war is going to undermine much of the good that Trump’s AI agenda could do, especially by driving old allies right into the arms of the Chinese govt.” He warns that U.S. allies like the EU might soon “cut a deal with the CCP to run DeepSeek & other Chinese AI on everything and box out US AI apps entirely.” In other words, protectionism isn’t just bad economics; it’s a strategic gift to Beijing.

If America wants to dominate AI, it must be the easiest place in the world to build data centers, deploy energy infrastructure, and scale up high-tech manufacturing. It cannot afford a bureaucratic maze with artificially inflated costs. Protectionism doesn't protect American workers; it protects inefficiency. Tariffs are a tax on us, and they are a tax especially on the very future we claim to want. In the race for AI, where speed and scale are everything, inefficiency is fatal.

Unfortunately, the need to defend the president’s protectionist policies and their wealth destruction has also led some administration members, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in particular, to embrace one of Democrats’ favorite economic myths: pitting Wall Street against Main Street. Peddling this myth was recently decried by the Editorial Board of the Wall Street Journal, who wrote in response to Trump-era tariff rhetoric:

Everyone wants Main Street to prosper, but pitting Wall Street against the rest of the country is one of the hoariest pages in the faux populist handbook… Wall Street as defined by the stock and financial markets is integral to prosperity on Main Street.

Exactly. Financial markets aren’t the enemy of working people; they’re how businesses get funded, workers get hired, and retirements get secured. About 60% of Americans own stocks directly or through retirement accounts. When tariffs or taxes spook the market, it’s not hedge funds that suffer most; it’s middle-income Americans watching their 401(k)s shrink.

Capital and labor are not adversaries. They are partners in economic growth. Republicans tempted by a class-warfare rhetoric should remember this bit of wisdom from the great economist Thomas Sowell. He said:

It was Thomas Edison who brought us electricity, not the Sierra Club. It was the Wright brothers who got us off the ground, not the Federal Aviation Administration. It was Henry Ford who ended the isolation of millions of Americans by making the automobile affordable, not Ralph Nadder.
Those who have helped the poor the most have not been those who have gone around loudly expressing “compassion” for the poor, but those who found ways to make industry more productive and distribution more efficient, so that the poor today can afford things that the affluent of yesterday could only dream about.

The future belongs to the country that gets its policies right—policies on innovation, labor, capital, and trade. America has every advantage: world-class institutions, an entrepreneurial culture, deep and sophisticated capital markets, and a skilled workforce. But we risk squandering all of it by peddling bad ideas borrowed from the left.

Populist slogans will not win the AI race, tariffs will not build resilient supply chains, and higher taxes will not create high-wage jobs. Republicans once understood this reality. If they want to lead again, they should stop railing against the free market and build a future that works for everyone.

Veronique de Rugy is the George Gibbs Chair in Political Economy and Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and a nationally syndicated columnist. She is a contributing editor to Civitas Outlook.

00
1x
10:13
More articles

A Battle for the Rule of Law

Constitutionalism
Apr 18, 2025

Can We Replay McKinley-ism?

Politics
Apr 18, 2025
View all

Join the newsletter

Receive new publications, news, and updates from the Civitas Institute.

Sign up
More on

Economic Dynamism

The American Dream Is Not a Coin Flip, and Wages Have Not Stagnated

This paper challenges the prevailing narrative that stagnant wages are causing the American dream to fade. It contrasts subjective public opinion with revised objective intergenerational mobility measures.

Scott Winship
Economic Dynamism
Mar 6, 2025
Political Economy and the Rise of Commercial Humanism

Western attitudes toward commerce have transformed from early moral condemnation to a modern appreciation that sees trade as socially beneficial.

Erik Matson
Economic Dynamism
Feb 28, 2025
Why Failure-to-Market Claims Are Preempted Under Federal Law

A California appellate court invented out of whole cloth a new and troubling theory of tort liability.

Richard Epstein, Benjamin Flowers
Economic Dynamism
Feb 5, 2025
Dynamism and Stagnation: An Outlook

Flexibility and responsiveness are particularly important during periods of shock.

Ed Glaeser
Economic Dynamism
Jan 8, 2025
No items found.
A Bad Business on the Bayou

Chevron finds itself the victim of a political alliance between the tort bar and Louisiana Republicans.

Michael Toth
Economic Dynamism
Apr 1, 2025
Congress Must Shield US Companies from European Regulations

Congress should exercise its constitutional powers over foreign commerce to guard American companies against overregulation by the European Union.

Michael Toth
Economic Dynamism
Mar 27, 2025
ESG Would Rain on Spring Break

Americans have access to abundant, reliable energy, unlike Europeans under strict climate mandates.

Michael Toth
Economic Dynamism
Mar 10, 2025
These Mayors Understand How to Run a City

Armed with common sense policies, three urban leaders are fighting a patient battle against chaos.

Joel Kotkin
Economic Dynamism
Jan 24, 2025

Dignity and Dynamism: The Future of Conservative Technology Policy

Economic Dynamism
Mar 5, 2025
1:05

Edward Glaeser on Dynamism and Stagnation

Economic Dynamism
May 8, 2024
1:05

Dynamism & Its Enemies: 2024 Austin Symposium Recap

Economic Dynamism
May 8, 2024
1:05

Nobel Laureate Edmund Phelps on What Makes Nations Prosper

Economic Dynamism
May 8, 2024
1:05

Deirdre McCloskey on Where Prosperity Comes From

Economic Dynamism
May 8, 2024
1:05
No items found.
No items found.
There Is No Substitute for Free Trade and Deregulated Markets

The world economy will teeter so long as the U.S. wields its tariff stick.

Richard Epstein
Economic Dynamism
Apr 15, 2025
How Tariffs Starve U.S. Investment

The incentives created by Trump’s misguided tariff gamble will ultimately discourage investment in America.

David Hebert, Daniel J. Smith
Economic Dynamism
Apr 10, 2025
American Aspiration: Our Anti-Dynamism Problem

Dynamism requires agency, creativity, risk tolerance, and sometimes a simple desire for adventure.

Ryan Streeter
Economic Dynamism
Apr 9, 2025
Trump's Tariff Fundamentalism

The stock market provides an early glimpse of what the future will hold, as tomorrow’s anticipated outcomes are reflected in the current value of shares.

Richard Epstein
Economic Dynamism
Apr 7, 2025
No items found.