Republicans Would Rather Get Rid of This Agency Than Upset Trump. That’s a Terrible Idea.

A functioning government requires institutions capable of carrying out laws, enforcing standards, responding to crises, and protecting the public interest. Weakening those institutions for short-term political gain can create long-term consequences that are difficult and expensive to reverse.

The political calculation is understandable. In today’s Republican Party, opposition to Trump can come with significant electoral risks. Lawmakers who challenge him often face backlash from party activists, primary challengers, and influential conservative media figures. As a result, many Republicans may view support for agency elimination as the safest political option.

Yet elected officials are not sent to Washington merely to follow political incentives. They are expected to exercise independent judgment and evaluate policies based on their merits. If an agency is failing, lawmakers should explain why, propose reforms, and demonstrate how its responsibilities will be handled more effectively in the future.

Simply abolishing an institution to satisfy a political constituency is not a governing strategy.

History offers numerous examples of government agencies that required modernization, restructuring, or increased accountability. It offers far fewer examples of successful efforts to eliminate major institutions without creating significant disruptions or unintended consequences.