Sure it would. But what "free market/less-government" meant a few years back isn't what voters want now. Other free market less-government things people wanted (social security privatization, bank deregulation) turned out not to be such great ideas.
I'm not sure those really were "free market/less-government" situations though.
The banking deregulation as an example simply didn't exist: banks were and still are heavily regulated — and the mind-numbingly stupid thing about the regulations is that they offer none of the ostensible protections that are claimed they are for. (The common law, for example, has nine felonies among which is larceny. We also have fraud
and embezzlement
… so what really is the need for so much regulation on banks?)
Requiring that banks not have lending standards isn’t exactly de-regulation. Social security privatization only happened trivially, and in an environment of government manipulation of the markets and abuse of them as wealth-transfer mechanisms.