|
Based on state of Iowa's estimated revenue of
$5,755,900,000
for the current fiscal year (2009), which ends
June 30, 2010.
Amount is calculated according to the date and time of your computer.
|
|
A Return to Normalcy: Why Presidents Harding and Coolidge
Still Matter
By John Hendrickson
The current economic recession has fostered a national
debate over various economic policies and theories that can be used to
bring about full recovery. President Barack Obama and Democrat leaders
in Congress have placed their faith in the economic theories of John
Maynard Keynes and using President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New
Deal as an example for policies and programs. Republicans tend to focus
on the theory of supply-side economics, which was championed in the
1980s by President Ronald Reagan. This theory emphasizes tax cuts and
economic growth, but at the same time limited government gets left out.
Policymakers need to examine the economic and tax policies of President
Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge. The Harding and Coolidge policies
focused on tax reform as well as reducing government spending and
growth. Both Harding and Coolidge realized that limited government was
an essential ingredient to economic prosperity.
In 1920 the United States economy went into a sharp
decline in the aftermath of the Great War. The Depression of 1920 is
often forgotten because it is overshadowed by the Great Depression and
the 1920 Depression lasted only a short time. “By far the most important
business cycle development of the first three decades of the twentieth
century was the very sharp economic downturn of 1920 and 1921.”[1]
With the economic decline “the estimated gross national product plunged
24% from $91.5 billion in 1920 to $69.6 billion in 1921. The number of
unemployed people jumped from 2.1 million in 1920 to 4.9 million in
1921.”[2]
President Warren Harding responded to the economic
depression by utilizing limited-government means. President Harding in
the presidential election of 1920 had campaigned on a “return to
normalcy” slogan which called for a policy of tax reform, reducing
government spending, and eliminating wasteful regulations from the
private sector.[3]
Harding believed in limited government. The Harding economic plan was
aided by Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon who shared the same
limited-government views as President Harding.
The Harding-Mellon plan resulted in tax and spending
reductions and pro-business policies to encourage an economic recovery
by 1922. Economic historian Jim Powell described the Harding-Mellon
economic record:
Federal spending was cut from $6.3 billion in 1920 to $5
billion in 1921. Federal taxes fell from $6.6 billion in 1920 to $5.5
billion in 1921 and $4 billion in 1922…With Harding’s tax and spending
cuts and relatively non-interventionist economic policy, GNP rebounded
to $74.1 billion in 1922. The number of unemployed fell to 2.8 million —
a reported 6.7 percent of the labor force — in 1922.
The Harding-Mellon economic plan continued after the
death of President Harding in the Coolidge administration.
President Calvin Coolidge and Secretary Mellon continued
to pursue limited-government objectives of debt reductions, tax reform,
and cutting back on government spending. President Coolidge and Mellon
were successful in cutting taxes. For example, the top tax rate on
incomes when Harding became President stood at a wartime level of 73
percent, but at the end of the Coolidge administration it had been
reduced to 25 percent, and lower rates had also been slashed.[4]
President Coolidge and Secretary Mellon also worked to
“cut the size of government” and he was “the last President to have a
budget surplus every year of his presidency.”[5]
In fact federal spending was at $3.5 billion in 1926.[6]
In addition the unemployment rate fell to a low of 1.8 percent in 1926.[7]
The economic policies of President Harding, President Coolidge, and
Secretary Mellon helped usher in the “Coolidge prosperity” of the 1920s.
President Harding, President Coolidge, and Secretary
Mellon understood that limited- government policies lead to economic
prosperity. They also understood that high levels of taxation,
government spending, and regulation are dangerous for economic growth.
In addition they believed in prudent spending and a balanced federal
budget. Although Harding, Coolidge, and Mellon were not pure supporters
of the free market, all three believed in economic nationalism and their
economic ideas can provide policy makers today with a solid blueprint
for our economy.
Ed Crane, President of The CATO Institute, recently wrote
that conservatives and Republicans need to start addressing spending
cuts and the “proper role of government.”[8]
Tax cuts can spur economic growth, but without the necessary ingredient
of cutting government spending growth, it can take away from the
effectiveness of tax reductions. President Obama and Democrats will
continue to pursue Keynesian and socialist policies, but Republican
policymakers should follow the constitutional governing style of the
Harding and Coolidge administrations. Harding and Coolidge proved that
cutting taxes, reducing government spending, and reducing debt is not
only a successful economic policy, but it follows constitutional
government.
John
Hendrickson is a Research Analyst at Public Interest Institute.
The views
expressed herein are those of the author and not necessarily those of
Public Interest Institute or Tax Education Foundation. They are brought
to you in the interest of a better-informed citizenry.
[1]Richard
Vedder and Lowell Gallaway, Out of Work: Unemployment and
Government in Twentieth-Century America, Holmes & Meier, New
York, 1993, p. 61.
[2]
Jim Powell, “America’s Greatest Depression Fighter,”
LewRockwell.com, December 23, 2003, <http://www.LewRockwell.com>
(May 6, 2009).
[3]
Jim Powell, “Not –So-Great Depression,” National Review
Online, January 7, 2009, <http://nationalreview.com> (May 6,
2009).
[4]
Burton W. Folsom, Jr. “Two Presidents, Two Philosophies, and Two
Different Outcomes,” The Freeman, June 2007, p. 33.
[7]
Powell, “Not-So-Great Depression.”
[8]
Edward H. Crane, “Obama is a Statist, Not a Socialist,”
CATO.org, April 29, 2009, <http://www.cato.org> (May 6,
2009).
|