DEAR EDITOR:
This past weekend I finally got fed up with the rhetoric that
comes from all points of the political spectrum.
DEAR EDITOR:
This past weekend I finally got fed up with the rhetoric that comes from all points of the political spectrum. Being rather analytical of mind, I decided to determine what data was available and if an analysis of the data would confirm or refute the rhetoric. The raw data I found is from The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis and the analysis and conclusions are mine.
Since both major parties want to claim the accomplishments that occurred while they inhabited The White House, I decided that I would compare the data based upon that criterion. The available data covers the years 1929 to the present with the last complete year being 2001. The Republicans were in The White House for 33 years and the Democrats for 40 years. I used Gross Domestic Product to measure the economy and it’s year over year growth to measure its health. I used current government expenditures as a measure of government’s size and it’s year over year growth to measure the growth of government. Finally, I looked at each year’s surplus or deficit as a percentage of that year’s GDP.
The economy grew at an average year over year rate of 4.63 percent during Republican years and 8.59 percent during Democrat years but the Republicans suffered because the GDP was reduced by almost half at the start of The Depression while they were in power.
To be fair I removed the start of The Depression years from the calculation, which then raised the Republican growth rate to 6.89 percent. Still it appears the economy has done better when a Democrat is in The White House. Only when I look at a window of 1981-2001 do I find a higher GDP growth rate for Republican years then for Democrat years, 6.72 percent vs.. 5.67 percent. Based upon this data neither party is clearly better for business or the economy but you would have to give a slight historical edge to the Democrats.
The government grew at an average year over year rate of 7.61 percent during Republican years and a whopping 14.27 percent during Democrat years but here the Democrats suffered because of the high government growth during World War II. Again to be fair I removed the WWII numbers, which reduced the Democrat growth rate to 8.31 percent. Government grew faster in the Democrat years but when compared to the average growth in the economy during the same period we find government grew slightly less fast then the overall economy during the those years. Government grew an average of almost 1 percent faster then the overall economy during the Republican years. Looking at the window of 1981-2001 again I find government growth of an average 7.68 percent year over year during the Republican years, almost 1 percent more then the overall economy, while government growth was 3.22 percent, over 2 percent less then the overall economy, during the Democrat years. Current government spending has grown from 2.51 percent of the GDP in 1929 to 19.21 percent in 2001 and the data indicates that neither party has been able to make a significant reduction in the size of government. Unfortunately with government spending growing faster then the GDP during Republican years it appears that most of the real government growth has occurred during Republican administrations. So much for one party being the party of smaller government.
Often government surpluses and deficits are used as examples of fiscal responsibility and so I decided to see if any conclusions could be drawn from a quick review. The top four deficit years were all during World War II and a Democrat administration.
Again to be fair since the numbers could be attributed to a single cause I did not include them in my analysis. The Republican administrations had nine surplus years and 24 deficit years while the Democrats had 16 surplus years and 20 deficit years, excluding the four years mentioned previously.
The top five years for the size of the surplus were all during Democrat administrations and seven of the top 10 years. The top six years for deficit size were all during Republican administrations and eight of the top 10 years. I don’t find much evidence of fiscal responsibility with deficit years outnumbering surplus years for both parties.
One last thing I noted while reviewing the raw data, in 1929 the source of government revenue was about equal from tax on corporate profits and personal income tax. By 2001 revenue from personal income tax was over five times the revenue from corporate profits tax. This shows, at least in relative terms, corporations do not pay tax, people do.
All I ask is to please support claims with data and reference the source of any data or analysis.
Art Darden, Gilroy
Submitted Monday, Jan. 13 to ed****@ga****.com
