Which Party is Better for the Economy?
CitizensOversight (2011-05-17) RaymondLutz
This Page: https://https://copswiki.org/Common/M1168
More Info: BudgetAndTaxation, PoliticalPhilosophy
DEMOCRATS v. REPUBLICANS on the issue of the U.S. ECONOMY
The following research was reproduced from the site: http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm. Although now a bit dated, (2004 was the last update) this analysis obviously still holds true. The pronoun "I" below refers to eriposte. This section is lightly edited to make it more current. The analysis period is convenient because we had 20 years of Democratic presidents and 20 years of Republican presidents.
(Here is a graphical and condensed format of the same data -- PartyComparisonCharts.pdf: Party Comparison Charts)
INTRODUCTION
In this section, I feature statistics on commonly used metrics used to measure U.S. economic growth and strength, and the relative impact that Democratic Presidents have had with respect to Republican Presidents. For the moment, I. am largely featuring links to already published data on the web, but I hope to review and analyze the data myself sometime in the future. The data is in the table below and my own comments are below the table.
A common refrain from Republicans and Independents who have doubts about Democratic Presidents, is that Democrats raise taxes and cause economic trouble. This page proves that this concern is unfounded because it has no basis in reality.
This is shown in two ways. 1. First the data compiled. in the table below shows that there is no proof that Republican Presidents. are better for the U.S. economy than Democratic Presidents. Indeed, the data indicates the opposite is likely true. 2. There are. multiple other facts in addition to this data that show that the superficial. argument about taxes is just that: superficial.
DATA TABLE
Acronyms: BLS = U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; BEA = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
| Metric | Source of data/ analysis |
Average under Democratic Presidents/ Administrations | Average under Republican Presidents/ Administrations | Who measured better on this metric? (See critiques page) |
| Average Ranking (lower the number the better) for highest GDP growth, real disposable personal income, employment/ unemployment, deficit reduction 1953-2001 | Average rank calculated from ranking data from Dan Ackman, Forbes.com | Overall rank: 4.58 (top 3 are Democrats) GDP rank: 3.8 Real Disposable Employment rank: 4.6 Deficit Reduction | Overall rank: 6.44 (Reagan is \#4) GDP rank: 7.2 Real Disposable Employment rank: 6.4 Deficit reduction | Democratic Presidents \[Also see this data |
| Real Disposable Personal Income Growth per year 1953-2001 | Dan Ackman, Forbes.com | 3.65% | 3.08% | Democratic Presidents |
| Employment gains per year 1953-2001 | Dan Ackman, Forbes.com | 1.684 million/year | 1.279 million/year | Democratic Presidents |
| Unemployment: 1962-2001 | P.L.A., using data from the BLS | 5.1 % | 6.75 % | Democratic Presidents |
| Unemployment: 1947-2001 Assuming that each President's policies took effect 1 year after his inauguration | Larry Bartels, Los Angeles Times |
4.8 % | 6.3 % | Democratic Presidents (trend similar if 2 year shift assumed) |
| Unemployment: 1948-2001 Assuming Presidents are also responsible for economic performance 3-5 years after they leave office | CalPundit, using data from the BLS | 3-yr lag: 5.06 %
4-yr lag: 5.04 % 5-yr lag: 5.01% | 3-yr lag: 6.16 % 4-yr lag: 6.18 % 5-yr lag: 6.21 % | Democratic Presidents |
| Average After-Tax Return on Tangible Capital: Jan 1952 - June 2004 | Roger Altman, Wall Street Journal (data from Federal Reserve) | 4.3% | 3.2% | Democratic Presidents \[For a Bush I + Bush II vs. Clinton comparison, see here\] |
| GDP growth: 1962-2001 | P.L.A., using data from the BEA | 3.9 % | 2.9 % | Democratic Presidents |
| GDP growth: 1948. - 2001 Assuming. Presidents are also responsible for. economic performance 3-5 years after they. leave office |
CalPundit,
using data. from the BEA |
3-yr
lag: 3.56 %
4-yr lag: 3.78 % 5-yr lag: 3.71 % |
3-yr
lag: 3.35 %
4-yr lag: 3.16 % 5-yr lag: 3.21 % |
Democratic Presidents |
| GDP
growth: 1930-2000 |
Carol
Vinzant in. Slate |
5.4% | 1.6 % | Democratic Presidents |
| Inflation: 1962-2001 |
P.L.A.,
using. data from. the BLS |
4.26 % | 4.96 % | Democratic Presidents |
| Inflation: 1948-2001 Assuming. Presidents are also responsible for. economic performance 3-5 years after they. leave office |
CalPundit,
using CPI. data from Economagic |
3-yr
lag: 3.33 %
4-yr lag: 3.07 % 5-yr lag: 3.20 % |
3-yr
lag: 4.36 %
4-yr lag: 4.60 % 5-yr lag: 4.48 % |
Democratic Presidents |
| Percentage
growth. in Total. Federal Spending: 1962-2001 |
P.L.A.,
using. data from. the U.S. Govt. Budget. 2003 |
6.96 % | 7.57 % | Democratic Presidents. if lower Govt. spending is better; Republican Presidents. if higher spending. is better Note,
however, that |
| Percentage
growth. in Non-Defense Federal Spending: 1962-2001 |
P.L.A.,
using. data from. the U.S. Govt. Budget. 2003 |
8.34 % | 10.08 % | Democratic Presidents. if lower Govt. spending is better; Republican Presidents. if higher spending. is better Note,
however, that |
| Non-defense
Federal Government. Employees: 1962-2001 |
P.L.A.,
using. data from. the U.S. Govt. Budget. 2003 |
Rose
by. 59,000 (16 % of total rise over. 40 years) |
Rose
by. 310,000 (84% of total rise over. 40 years) |
Democratic Presidents (assuming smaller Govt. is. better) |
| Yearly
budget. deficit: 1962-2001 |
P.L.A.,
using. data from. the U.S. Govt. Budget. 2003 |
$36 billion | $190 billion | Democratic Presidents |
| Increase
in. National Debt: 1962-2001 |
P.L.A.,
using. data from. the U.S. Govt. Budget. 2003 See. follow-up
by. P.L.A. |
Total
debt increased. by $0.72 trillion (20 years) |
Total
debt increased. by $3.8 trillion (20 years) |
Democratic Presidents |
| Annual
stock. market return: . 1927 (through) 1998 |
Pedro
Santa-Clara and Rossen. Valkanov Research. Paper, UCLA (via Atrios) Results. are "statistically significant" Also. reported by |
~
11% (value weighted CRSP index. minus 3 month Treasury. Bill) |
~
2% (value weighted CRSP index. minus 3 month Treasury. Bill) |
Democratic Presidents (Delta increases to 16% for The. study says: |
| Annual
stock. market return: (1900) 1927 - 2000 |
Carol
Vinzant in. Slate |
12.3 % (S&P 500) | 8.0 % (S&P 500) | Democratic Presidents |
| Annual
stock. market return: (1900) 1927 - 2000 |
Carol
Vinzant in. Slate |
Democratic
Senate 10.5 % (S&P 500) Democratic. House 10.9 % (S&P 500) |
Republican
Senate 9.4 % (S&P 500) Republican. House 8.1 % (S&P 500) |
Democratic Senate. or House. (but see article for. qualifications) |
| Annual
stock. market return: (1900) 1927 - 2000 |
Stock
Traders' Almanac as. reported by Carol. Vinzant in Slate |
13.4 % (Dow) | 8.1 % (Dow) | Democratic Presidents |
| Rankings
for. highest GDP growth, biggest. increase in jobs, biggest increase. in personal disposable income after. taxes, biggest rise in hourly. wages, lowest. Misery Index (inflation plus. unemployment), etc. (until 2001) |
Arthur
Blaustein, Mother. Jones |
N/A. But. all these best case metrics. were under Democratic. Presidents |
N/A | Democratic Presidents |
| . | . | . | . | . |
| District
spending by Congress: 1995. - 2001 |
Associated
Press report: 1, 2 |
Democratic
districts: $3.9 billion in 1995 to $5.2 billion in 2001 (34% increase) |
Republican
districts: $3.9 billion in 1995 to $5.8 billion in 2001 (52% increase) |
Hard
to. say who is better but certainly not Republicans, who shifted. spending to RICHER districts. from poorer. |