President Donald Trump meddled in the free market during his first term and created a “dumb industrial policy” that he is only now starting to fix, according to a prominent conservative newspaper.
In a Monday evening editorial, The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board claimed telecom mogul Charlie Ergen had been rescued by a regulatory system he once tried to “jury rig.” In 2019 Trump forced T-Mobile and Sprint to sell spectrum and wireless assets to Ergen’s Dish network as a condition of permitting their merger. While the purpose of this policy was to create additional competition in the 5G market place, Ergen never built a 5G network, and under President Joe Biden the FCC extended deadlines even as Ergen donated $100,000 to a Biden Super PAC.
Yet because President Trump pressured FCC Chair Brendan Carr to allow Ergen to sell some of his unprofitable licenses rather than have them reclaimed by the FCC, Ergen has been able to strike deals that may ultimately create that fourth wireless competitor which regulators were unable to artificially engineer.
“This is a tale of dumb industrial policy that might end well despite government planners,” the Board opined, slamming Trump’s original meddling in the process. “The original sin was the first Trump DOJ’s attempt to jury-rig a fourth competitor. One political intervention invariably begets more.”
On another occasion, the Board pointedly concluded that “that’s what happens when politicians and regulators try to manage markets.”
The Wall Street Journal, though generally supportive of Trump, has recently pointed criticisms his way on a variety of issues. Earlier in March, it urged Trump to abandon the SAVE America Act, which Trump is pushing in the hope of retaining control of Congress during the 2026 midterm elections.
“The decentralized nature of American elections is a source of resilience, and Republicans rightly opposed President Biden’s attempt to federalize voting rules on the lax California model,” wrote the Journal. “Have they given up federalist principle? If 51 Senate votes are all it takes to limit mail ballots across the country and require voter ID, Democrats next time will use 51 votes to mandate ballot harvesting and ban voter ID.”
The Journal also disputed Trump’s claim that “voter fraud is endemic.”
“Audits in a variety of places—Georgia, Michigan, Texas, Utah, Idaho—have found noncitizen voting and registration to be rare,” the Journal said. “Other states might be worse, but consider incentives: Illegal immigrants who want to stay are trying to avoid being noticed by the authorities. Green card holders have much to lose if they commit a crime. Prosecuting violators is good for deterrence, and vigilance is important.”
Also in March the Journal argued that Trump’s tariffs have been a lag on the US economy.
“Oh, and if Mr. Trump wants a tax-cut boost for the economy while the war continues, he could call off his new 15% universal tariff,” the Journal pointed out. “Consider it our contribution to easing everyone’s economic anxiety.”
Finally, in March the Journal ran an editorial by columnist William A. Galston argued that the Iran war has “backfired” against the president.
“When the current war began, public support was lower than for any other major conflict undertaken in nearly a century,” Galston wrote. “Before attacking Iran, however, Mr. Trump offered only a cursory rationale to Congress and the American people. The need for surprise might conceivably have justified his near-silence on such a grave matter.”
He added, “But there is no justification for his failure to offer a systematic and sustained case for the war once it began,” concluding that a war with a roughly 39 percent approval rating has “backfired” on the president who waged it.
“The American people don’t think that the president has clearly explained the goals of the war, and the share who think he has done so is smaller today than it was at the beginning,” Galston argued. “Americans have concluded that the war will weaken the economy and leave the country less safe. They believe that it is a war of choice, not necessity, and that it is going badly. And despite the administration’s call for short-term sacrifice, people reject paying more for gasoline as their patriotic duty by a margin of 2 to 1.”