Popular Policies Are Fickle

One problem with populism is that what's popular changes frequently

Stef Belden, Joe Biden’s national policy director in 2020, thinks politicians should represent the views of their constituents.

My response with respect to voters is that candidates should run if and only if they believe they can effectively represent the views of their future constituents while remaining consistent with their personal values. On the margins, an elected official can shape public opinion. But generally, elected officials should represent the views of their constituents instead of trying to convince their constituents to change their minds.

Said another way, she thinks politicians should take positions that are popular.

I think this is the exact wrong way to view politics. Taking positions just because your constituents like them is a good way to get elected, but it’s also a one-way ticket to counterproductive populism. Take the issue of tarrifs. As Scott Sumner points out, people liked them before the election.

Americans also tended to support one of Mr. Trump’s signature economic plans: imposing stiff tariffs on goods produced overseas. In September, a New York Times/Siena College poll of likely voters in three Midwest states found that just over half supported expanding tariffs on products made outside the country. After the election, a CBS News/YouGov poll in late November also found that 52 of Americans said they supported new tariffs. An overwhelming majority of Trump voters, 83 percent, said they did.

But, once they realized their 401ks are going to go down and their groceries are going to go up, they changed their mind.

Every public opinion survey conducted in recent weeks supports this conclusion. For example, a CNN/SSRS poll released on March 12 found that 61% of Americans, and 72% of young adults, disapprove of the way Trump is handling tariffs. Fifty-nine percent of Americans without college degrees and 62% of those making less than $50,000 also registered their disapproval. Among white non-college voters, the heart of Trump’s coalition, the president managed only a 50-50 split. Of the Americans who voted for him in 2024, 20% disagree with his tariff policies. A Washington Post/IPSOS poll conducted in mid-February and a Quinnipiac poll released on March 13 produced nearly identical results.

The problem is simple: most people don’t know what’s good for them, let alone whether imports lower GDP. It sounds elitist, but why would you take macroeconomic policy from a non-college voter who can’t get a manufacturing job despite there being literal millions of open manufacturing jobs? It would be like asking a homeless person for career advice.

We have a representative democracy for a reason. Representatives, who are generally smarter than the average guy, adjust policies based on the overall situation of their constituency. So, if their constituents are economically struggling, they enact policies to address the economic struggles. What they don’t do is enact specific policies that the constituency wants. If they did that, what would even be the point of having the representative?

So, I couldn’t disagree with Belden more. Feelings don’t matter more than facts. We need politicians who believe in something and are willing and able to convince people that, actually, they know better.

Otherwise, all you’ll have is governing based on the whims of the people, and that doesn’t serve anybody’s interest.