Government is not a business. Don’t treat it like one

By trade, I am a management consultant. Though my work varies from day to day, the core purpose of my job is usually to help organizations operate more efficiently by maximizing revenue and minimizing costs. If the government were a business, these would be its guiding principles. But it is not. And for that reason, I have deep concerns about the increasing push to run government like a corporation.

The overarching role of government, as outlined in the Constitution, is to “form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty …” In contrast, Milton Friedman, the renowned conservative economist, famously argued that a corporation’s only duty is to deliver profits to its shareholders. In his view, businesses should not concern themselves with externalities, community well-being or the welfare of their employees beyond what is legally required — profit is the singular goal. There is wisdom in Friedman’s perspective: A narrow focus on efficiency and profitability tends to drive innovation and competition. But taken to the extreme, it leads to abuses of power.

You may have shared my outrage upon learning that Boeing executives knowingly concealed fatal design flaws in the 737 Max, leading to two crashes (Lion Air 2018, Ethiopian Airlines 2019) and 346 deaths. Similarly, large tobacco companies like Altria (formerly Philip Morris) knew for decades that their products were causing lung cancer rates to skyrocket and sending tens of thousands of Americans to an early grave each year but deliberately misled the public to protect company profits. Closer to home, U.S. Magnesium — responsible for up to 25% of northern Utah’s pollution — was recently found to have violated environmental regulations dozens of times over the past several years, fouling Utah’s air and sickening its residents.

The individuals who ran these companies had a powerful short-term financial incentive to act in ways that harmed “the general Welfare” — that is, you and me. (In the long run, each company paid the price for their short-sighted decisions.) One might imagine that if financial performance were to become the primary benchmark for success for the government, it would create a system of perverse incentives where critical but unprofitable functions — such as public education, infrastructure maintenance and social safety nets — would inevitably be deprioritized or dismantled altogether. Ironically, the result is long-term inefficiency; after all, an uneducated society without roads or health care is hardly an economically productive one.

Of course, a well-run government should be fiscally responsible, but its success should be measured not just by cost savings, but by outcomes: Are people healthier? Are communities safer? Are citizens able to exercise their rights freely? Are businesses able to thrive within a stable and fair system? These are the metrics of a functioning democracy — not just whether the budget is balanced or GDP is increasing.

The argument in favor of a business-like government is often framed in terms of efficiency. Proponents, such as Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency, argue that bureaucracy is bloated and agencies should be held accountable. Few reasonable people would disagree. Wasteful spending and inefficiency should be addressed. But the solution is not to haphazardly cut government jobs, deregulate essential protections or expose citizens to new risks. Musk’s vision may sound appealing, but we should ask: Efficiency for whom? A government that prioritizes speed and cost-cutting over careful governance risks serving the powerful at the expense of ordinary citizens.

Applying the principles of corporate efficiency to government without accounting for the broader public good would be like evaluating a hospital’s success purely on profitability, rather than patient outcomes. Just as we expect a health care system to prioritize saving lives over cutting costs, we should expect our government to prioritize serving people over simply running a lean operation.

Businesses exist to make money. Governments exist to serve people. A government that prioritizes efficiency above all else will inevitably fail in the long run at its most essential task: ensuring the well-being of its citizens. Instead, it must provide stability, security and a foundation upon which both individuals and businesses can thrive.

Promoting the general welfare is not always good business. But perhaps that’s exactly the point.