If You Don't Like It, Move!

Protests have erupted over President Trump’s latest efforts to rein in the federal bureaucracy through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Critics warn of authoritarian overreach, dismantling public programs, and undermining constitutional norms. The optics are chaotic, the tone combative, and the implementation far from perfect.

But here is another way to think about it.

Donald Trump won the presidency convincingly. You do not have to like him to appreciate the core message that resonated with millions: Big Government, the Administrative State, and a gridlocked Congress no longer work for most Americans. Of all the candidates, only Trump made this critique central. The DOGE initiative, for all its rough edges, is an attempt to return power from the federal bureaucracy back to the people.

Intent vs. Outcomes: The Education Case

Take the U.S. Department of Education (DoE). It sounds unthinkable to shrink or eliminate it. After all, what could be more vital than educating our children? But that is where the confusion lies. The intent of the DoE is not in dispute. The outcomes are.

Public education, by almost every major measure, is faltering:

• Stagnant or declining math and reading scores (NAEP)

• Low teacher retention rates

• High student loan default rates

• Ballooning cost of higher education

• Declining ROI of college degrees

• Disproportionate funding gaps across districts

• Loss of local control and parental trust

Please do not mistake my critique of public education outcomes as a criticism of the individuals who serve in the Department of Education. Most are dedicated, well-intentioned professionals—Americans who care deeply about their mission and exemplify the kind of integrity you would trust in a neighbor or entrust with your children.

However, when outcomes repeatedly fall short of expectations, structural reform becomes not only justified but essential. In a functioning democracy, persistent failure signals the need for redesign. If a federal agency cannot deliver on its intended goals, then shifting authority to more local, responsive institutions is both rational and responsible.

Decentralization Is Not Abandonment

Some argue that eliminating federal oversight is tantamount to abandoning citizens. But remanding authority to states is not the same as removing protections. Law, law enforcement, and funding are distinct. Just because Washington steps back does not mean laws disappear or state systems cannot step forward.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution—reserving powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people—supports this shift toward decentralization. Many state governments already have legal frameworks, bureaucracies, and community-based knowledge better suited to enforce education policy. Moreover, laws do not disappear with agencies. They can still be enforced through litigation, local regulation, and public pressure. In fact, lawsuits are a vital enforcement tool in a decentralized democracy.

A Personal Example: Voting With Our Feet

Let us walk through a real-life example. In the early 2000s, when my wife and I were moving to the Washington, D.C. area with our four young children, we could have settled anywhere. But we made public education our highest priority.

So we chose the Langley High School pyramid—an area known for exceptional public schools in the early 2000s. It was not the cheapest or most convenient, but we traded other luxuries and conveniences (new cars, vacations, longer commute times, etc.) to be in the right district. It was not just about money; it was about willingness to change, sacrifice, and prioritize. We embraced the "Pursuit of Happiness" concept from the Declaration of Independence and sought public education as our happiness priority.

Everyone has constraints. Some are more opportunity-constrained than others. But everyone has some ability to make tradeoffs. Choosing not to change is a decision too.

And this is the heart of the matter: choice requires agency. Whether it is switching neighborhoods, changing schools, or moving to a state with better public services, we must preserve the ability of Americans to vote with their feet. That means fewer centralized decisions, more local autonomy, and more diversity of choice.

Policy Suggestion: Help People Move

If I were to recommend one impactful federal social program, it would be this: Help people move. The late comedian Sam Kinison once shouted that the solution to world hunger was not food—but U-Hauls. Kinison advocated for moving to where the food is. Beneath the humor lies a serious policy insight: reduce the money costs or transaction costs of mobility, and people will reallocate themselves toward opportunity and away from systemic failure.

However, there is a structural obstacle: local governments are often disincentivized to support mobility. Their tax base—largely funded through property taxes—depends on people staying put. Bureaucratic salaries and public budgets are tied to rising home values and stable populations. This dynamic creates a perverse incentive: obscure risk, suppress market signals, and keep people from moving—even when it is in their long-term interest.

Consider California’s decision to cap property insurance premiums. While framed as a consumer protection measure, it fundamentally distorts the true cost of risk. By preventing insurers from charging actuarially sound rates in high-risk wildfire zones, the financial burden is often redistributed—creating cross-subsidies where residents in safer, lower-risk areas unknowingly absorb part of the cost. This dynamic not only discourages relocation from vulnerable regions but also erodes fairness in pricing. The result is a hidden tax on prudence, sustaining local tax bases and bureaucratic budgets at the expense of long-term system integrity. It is a textbook case of short-term political expediency undermining market efficiency and public safety.

That is why mobility support is so crucial. The United States is vast and richly diverse. People should be empowered to discover communities that align with their values, career goals, and educational priorities. Whether seeking safer neighborhoods, better schools, or functioning public services, mobility is one of the most powerful tools of self-determination.

Freedom is not merely the right to speak or worship. It is the ability to reposition your life when local institutions falter. Markets thrive when people can act on accurate signals. Democracies remain dynamic when citizens can vote with their feet.

The message is simple: If your government no longer works for you, find one that does—and let policy help you get there.

In Conclusion: Pursue Happiness Somewhere Else

To those who say "If you do not like it, protest!" I say, your best protest could be to move. Your community is not a cage. If your school system, HOA, public services, or laws no longer reflect your values, explore alternatives. We are citizens of a free country, not captives of ZIP codes.

As the Declaration of Independence reminds us, government exists to secure our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That pursuit includes the freedom to pack up and try again somewhere new.

Resources for the Curious

• National Center for Education Statistics. "The Nation’s Report Card: 2022 Reading and Mathematics Assessments." U.S. Department of Education, 2022. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/

• U.S. Department of Education. "Federal Student Loan Portfolio." Office of Federal Student Aid, 2023. https://studentaid.gov/data-center/student/portfolio

• The College Board. "Trends in College Pricing and Student Aid 2023." College Board, 2023. https://research.collegeboard.org/trends

• American Institutes for Research. "Teacher Attrition and Mobility." National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (CALDER), 2023. https://caldercenter.org/

• Third Way. "The Student Debt Crisis." 2022. https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-student-debt-crisis

• National Center for Education Statistics. "The Nation's Report Card." NAEP, 2023.

• Hayek, F.A. The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press, 1944.

• Buchanan, James M. and Gordon Tullock. The Calculus of Consent. University of Michigan Press, 1962.

• Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.

• Munger, Michael C. Tomorrow 3.0: Transaction Costs and the Sharing Economy. Cambridge University Press, 2018.

• Munger, Mike. "The Answer is Transaction Costs." Podcast, various episodes.

• Kinnison, Sam. "U-Hauls!" Comedy sketch, YouTube.

• Hulett, Jeff. “Signals in the Smoke: Why Markets Reveal Truths That Intervention Hides.” The Curiosity Vine, January 19, 2024.

• Hulett, Jeff. “The Insurance Pricing Game: How I Learned the Hard Way to Shop Smarter.” Personal Finance Reimagined, April 20, 2024.

• Hulett, Jeff. Making Choices, Making Money. The Curiosity Vine Press, 2022.