Fiscal Conservatives. Who Knew?

I came across an article at slate.com, with some surprising statistics, showing how well the country has done under Democratic vs Republican administrations in eight economic categories. These cover the period from 1960-2006 (and so don't include the economic collapse of  2008).

These facts will probably surprise many people, because they run  counter to most people’s opinions about the two parties regarding fiscal competence and managing the economy.

From writer Michael Kinsley:

"The figures below are all from the Annual Economic Report of the President (2008), and the analysis is primitive. Nevertheless, what these numbers show, almost beyond doubt, is that Democrats are better at virtually every economic task that is important to Republicans."

"On average, in years when the president is a Democrat, the economy grows faster; inflation is lower; fewer people can't find a job; the federal government spends a smaller share of GDP, whether or not you include defense spending; and the deficit is lower (or—sweet Clinton-years memory—the surplus is higher). The one category that Republicans win is, unsurprisingly, federal taxes as a share of GDP. But it is no trick to lower taxes if you don't lower spending".

1.  GDP  % change (growth)                             Democrats are over 1% better for growth

      Democrats              4.09

      Republicans            2.94

     

2.  Inflation                                                       Inflation is less under Democrats

      Democrats             3.81

      Republicans           4.50

3.  Unemployment                                           Unemployment is lower under Democrats

      Democrats             5.33

      Republicans           6.21

     

4.  Federal Taxes                                             Republicans have less than .5% lower taxes

      Democrats              18.40

      Republicans            17.97

     

5.  Federal Spending                                     Democrats spend over 1% less!  "Tax and Spend Liberals?"   No.

      Democrats              19.60

      Republicans            20.67

     

6.  Deficit                                                       The deficit is over 1.5% less under Democrats!

      Democrats              -1.21

      Republicans            -2.70

     

7.  Defense Spending                                    This one is close, but Democrats spend more on defense, not less.

      Democrats               5.83

      Republicans             5.71

     

8.  Non-Defense Spending                            But for overall spending, Democrats spend less!

      Democrats               13.77

      Republicans            14.96

    
(end of article)

Wow.

It should be noted that there are many factors involved in these results, not the least of which is the makeup of the House and Senate in any particular term.

However, when considering only whether the country has done better with a Republican or a Democrat in office, the results have been totally one-sided in favor of the Democrats, who have proved much better at managing the economy, as well as following the 'conservative principles' of reduced spending and smaller government.

Of course, people don't always vote in concordance with their stated beliefs, and so these results probably won't sway many people who believe the GOP is the party of 'fiscal responsibility' regardless of what the economic statistics show. The term "Cognitive Dissonance" is used to describe the situation when a person holds two or more views that are inconsistent with each other, and we clearly see a good deal of cognitive dissonance in politics, and there's no reason to think this issue will prove any different.

While there may be other legitimate reasons for supporting the GOP, clearly lowering spending, reducing the deficit and increasing growth cannot be among them, as the Democrats have been a full percentage point better at all three.

Although we should remember that correlation does not prove causation, these statistics include a long enough time span and are so solidly in favor of the Democrats, it isn't a fluke or a 'cherry-picked' analysis.  I did not include Mr. Kinsley's chart showing the results if you add a one-year 'buffer' assuming it takes a President a year to put his policies in place, but they show the same results.

These satistics add weight to Rick Santorum's argument that social policy should be the focus of the Republican platform, in that historically the Democrats have now been shown to be better at the managing the economy.  Including the two most recent terms isn't going to alter these figures, President Obama has done a far better job in his three years than President Bush did in his second term (I will be presenting the evidence for this claim in future columns, but considering Bush's second term included the worst recession since the Great Depression, it's not really a difficult claim to prove).

So next time you're sitting around the dinner table, or hanging out at the proverbial water cooler at work, when your favorite Republican brings up the issue of outrageous spending by the Democrats, bust out your iphone and dial up some facts. At least the discussion can then revolve around some evidence rather than the very pervasive myth of Republican superiority in this department.


reference:  http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/readme/2008/09/politicians_lie_numbers_dont.html