Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent insists that we evaluate the Trump administration’s economic program in toto, rather than critiquing any individual element (“Trump’s Three Steps to Economic Growth,” op-ed, May 5). One can understand the request, considering analysts predict that the gross-domestic-product losses sure to be incurred from new tariffs, retaliation and economic uncertainty will likely offset any real GDP gains from tax reform and deregulation.

Yet Mr. Bessent goes on to misstate the conclusions of the “China Shock” literature, exaggerating losses and ignoring gains, while citing three tariff objectives that are as mutually exclusive as they are elusive: opening markets, reshoring industry and raising revenue. This myopia and misdirection have become standard fare as the administration continually shifts its rationale for ill-advised and indefensible trade policy.

Perhaps worst of all, Mr. Bessent buys into the narrative, long pushed by the left, that the vast majority of middle-class, Main Street Americans haven’t benefited from decades of open trade and strong economic performance.

Perhaps worst of all, Mr. Bessent buys into the narrative, long pushed by the left, that the vast majority of middle-class, Main Street Americans haven’t benefited from decades of open trade and strong economic performance. That’s belied by decades of real median wage gains and record-low unemployment. This fallacy leads to bad policy, such as making an already too-narrow tax base narrower by exempting tips and overtime from taxes. The U.S. already has the most progressive tax system in the developed world. It would be foolish to make it more so. To paraphrase The Who’s famous lyric: The party on the right is now the party on the left.