1937 Haunts Democrats During Spending Debate

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - 1937 Haunts Democrats During Spending Debate stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

March 13, 2009 09:41 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Depression

When President Obama ventured to Capitol Hill to meet with House Republicans shortly after Inauguration, he was met by a barrage of questions about the deficit and out of control spending.

Obama's response reached back to the Great Depression. According to several Republicans in the room, Obama raised the specter of 1937, the year President Franklin Roosevelt succumbed to conservative pressure and cut spending, leading, economists insist, to a renewal of the economic collapse that has been dubbed the "recession within the Depression."

Democratic leaders in both chambers of Congress also take the long view, sharing Obama's concern that pressure from the GOP to cut spending could reverse any economic gains made.

"We have to understand what took place during the Great Depression. There was deficit spending throughout the Great Depression and they stopped it a little too soon," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) the day after Obama addressed a joint session of Congress.

"President Obama has said he's going to look every place he can to save money, but we also recognize that we're going to have to spend some money to get out of this hole. Government is the only party that has any money," Reid said.

The Huffington Post asked Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) about FDR's decision to cut spending. "We're not going to let it happen again. In the middle '30s -- '36, etc. -- they were concerned about what was happening so they tightened their belts in terms of spending," she said, "and that caused a recession within the Depression, instead of keeping the momentum going."

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said that Democrats will be vigilant about cutting spending too soon. "The Keynesian view of the Depression and the way to deal with it is to make up for the lack of private spending by bringing in public spending. And whenever you try to balance the budget, you withdraw public spending. So there are people that speculated the downturn in 1937" was a result of cutbacks, said Waxman.

FDR was inaugurated in March 1933. Following a banking sector rescue, a devaluation of the dollar and massive government spending, the economy grew briskly in 1934, '35 and '36. He was reelected in a landslide of historic proportions.

Story continues below
advertisement

In 1937, under intense pressure to shave the deficit, he sought to balance the budget by cutting spending and raising taxes. The economy turned back around.

"That's a lesson learned," said Pelosi. "Not that we would do that, but for those who might think that [cutting spending is] a good idea. When you have to stimulate, you have to stimulate. And that's what we have to do."

Congressional Republicans, meanwhile, have called for a "spending freeze."

"The President's budget is an anti-stimulus," said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio.) "By taxing too much, spending too much, and borrowing too much, it will kill jobs, slow the economy even further, and hurt middle-class families and small businesses."

Christina Romer, the head of Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, warned in a speech this week at the Brookings Institution of a "lesson from the Great Depression: beware of cutting back on stimulus too soon."

"Growth was very rapid in the mid-1930s," said Romer. "Real GDP increased 11 percent in 1934, nine percent in 1935 and 13 percent in 1936...Industrial production finally surpassed its July 1929 peak in December 1936."

Roosevelt succeeded in reducing the deficit by roughly 2.5 percent of GDP. But at a steep price: In 1937, GDP still grew, but only by five percent. It turned south in 1938, falling by three percent.

"[T]aking the wrong turn in 1937 effectively added two years to the Depression. The 1937 episode is an important cautionary tale for modern policymakers," said Romer, who extensively studied the period during her academic career. The private sector will recover eventually, she said, but "we will need to monitor the economy closely to be sure that the private sector is back in the saddle before government takes away its crucial lifeline."

Republicans don't join in the praise of deficit spending. In analyzing the Great Depression, the GOP blames protectionist trade policies for the reversal in economic growth.

"No, it's what he did all along," said Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) of Roosevelt, rejecting the notion that the '37 cutback hurt the recovery effort. "The Smoot-Hawley Tarriff, raising taxes--that's what kept us in the Depression so long."

Economists agree that tax hikes - done for the purpose of cutting the deficit -- were a big part of the '37 downturn. The federal government began collecting Social Security taxes that year, taking a big bite out of consumers' ability to spend.

Smoot-Hawley was passed in 1930 and is derided by free traders as the epitome of counter-productive protectionism. (Many Democrats also agree that the provision had negative implications for economic growth, but reject the idea that it played a major roll in the '37 reversal.)

"I think one of the major factors was protectionism and raising tariffs," said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). "I think Smoot-Hawley, in the view of most historians...contributed to the worldwide Depression and basically caused a reduction in world trade that was dramatic."

McCain said that by 1937, wasteful spending caught up with the economy. "I also think that some of the quote stimulus that was used at that time was ineffective. They were basically make-work jobs that didn't have a permanent effect," he said.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the Financial Services Committee, said that there are key differences between today and the 1930s.

"You should not forget history, but you shouldn't slavishly follow it," he said. "We are not worried that Obama is going to do that" - cut spending prematurely - "at this point."

Frank said that once the spending kicks in, the pressure to cut it will diminish. "The anti-spending argument is at its strongest right now, because we've got the criticism without the benefits," he said.

"At some point we've got to reduce the deficit, but I don't think some version of right-wingism is coming back in fashion. If we're right, that spending is going to be more popular three and four and five months from now, because the economy starts to turn around, maybe at the end of the year, and there are police working and there are schools built. I expect to be taking credit for that all year."

Learning from past errors is one thing, said Waxman, but his parents wouldn't countenance referring to FDR's decision as a mistake.

"My parents would never tolerate anyone criticizing Franklin Roosevelt. They probably would be angry at Obama," said Waxman, had they heard his remarks to House Republicans.

"No one had a road map at that time. When I feel discouraged about where we are right now, the thing that gives me hope is that we've had people who've thought through depressions."

Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), the top Republican on the Financial Services Committee, said he was staying out of the debate for now. "I don't feel qualified really to offer my own opinion on none of that," said Bachus. "I know a lot of members of Congress are very sure that they know the answer to every problem up here."

When President Obama ventured to Capitol Hill to meet with House Republicans shortly after Inauguration, he was met by a barrage of questions about the deficit and out of control spending. Obama's re...
When President Obama ventured to Capitol Hill to meet with House Republicans shortly after Inauguration, he was met by a barrage of questions about the deficit and out of control spending. Obama's re...
 
Comments
481
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
- Erdgeist I'm a Fan of Erdgeist 74 fans permalink
photo

When Republicans say, "The Smoot-Hawley Tarriff, raising taxes--that's what kept us in the Depression so long" they are spreading a generous amount of manure. Recent computer modeling has proven that the Smoot-Hawley (tariff) Act of 1930, signed after the October crash of 1929, had very little adverse effect on either income or employment. Another study found the opposite, that the tariffs actual booted the GNP by 2% which acted to stimulate the ecomony in a Keynesia-type demand.

What is of importance to grasp is that the Smoot-Hawley Act was a reaction to the crash of the economy in October 1929. It didn't create the Great Depression, in other words. The cause of the Great Depression had been brewing long before 1929. One place where it was brewing was in the unregulated commercial banking system (does this ring a bell?)

I think the late economist Hyman Minsky well understood the real cause of the Great Depression -- which still applies today. His notion of the genesis of a financial crises presupposes that when irrational optimism--which we know as plain old greed--is coupled with the appearance of a booming economy, this generates a huge bubble. Minsky goes on to say that in such an expansion of the economy, inversely, caution and prudence contract. With this contraction of caution and prudence, soon the great lessons of economic history are forgotten until the bubble bursts.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 PM on 03/15/2009

Please pass this on to everyone you know. Every American should see this. So once and for all, the GOP will stop the nonsense about minorities and poor people causing our financial crisis.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:43 PM on 03/14/2009

One of the greatest hoaxes made in rewriting American history was the cockeyed misunderstanding that Smoot-Hawley was a major contributor or significant factor in the sources of theGreat Depression. Trade dried up because commerce dried up. We prudently protected our basic industries as all countries are doing today as they have trade surpluses with the most bankrupted mercantelistic colony in human history. Check the records, including the last quarter century and then call my ideas (which are held by millions) misleading and inaccurate.
We are where we are because countries with trade surpluses, after taking over our domestic markets and destroying our own manufactrurers, loaned us and loaned us more until we are in virtual bondage. Americans no longer own their own land. These are the dismal facts. We must somehow extricate ourselves and make a means of employment for our citizens. If not, we will endanger our form of governance.
Our first duty is to define the problem and its sources. Then with Constitutional fidelity we can address the problem with united support.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:17 AM on 03/14/2009
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 131 fans permalink

It is truly amazing how out of touch Republicans continue to be. Even with Bush doubling the national debt, with a war against the wrong country, and with the worst economy since Herbert Hoover, the GOP continues to insist that it is the Democrats who are ruining this country.

Clearly, the majority of Americans trust the Dems much, much, much more than they do the GOP, or they wouldn't have voted for them overwhelmingly in the last two elections. Given that the Republicans still don't have a clue about anything, it would appear that the next election will also be a Democratic landslide.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:43 AM on 03/14/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

Man this has been an interesting learning experience but I must come to terms with ideas as we all must explorer them. It is that realization that lead to President Obama and in the words or Martha Stewart "It's a good thing".

Now there are those that will try to turn that into a god thing as historically those in power try to link the 2.

However they are not at all alike.

As far as I can tell from a cursery examination that which the entirely sure call a high power stopps quite low on a regular basis. What with call for death and the attempt at mirror of life like ideals.

I must admit I have smoked and I have been listening. I almost went crazy myself. Some even say I have many times.

Still I can see. Beyond me. This great big thing. Collective thought aside there is a way.

Rock n Roll
Real
It never loses...
While George's guitar gently weeps...
While we don't need education...
While we think we understand...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 AM on 03/14/2009
- miltonista I'm a Fan of miltonista 17 fans permalink

can i have some of what you're smoking?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:36 AM on 03/14/2009

You are really screwed up, I am not at all sure it is the smoke....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 AM on 03/14/2009
- Oakland I'm a Fan of Oakland 11 fans permalink
photo

Can't blame that on pot.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:03 AM on 03/14/2009

Change you can believe in. I think that Reid and Pelosi just declared it is 1937 again. I think econimic reality has changed a bit since then. This economy is not as bad as it was in the early 1980's. But Obama and his team can get us there....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 AM on 03/14/2009
- Oakland I'm a Fan of Oakland 11 fans permalink
photo

Are you kidding? It is twice as bad as it was in the 80s. In the 80s, globalization and the race to the bottom was only a Reagan dream. It took the 90s Bill Clinton to make it a reality, and 20 years for it to decimate the middle class.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:06 AM on 03/14/2009
- ILibertine I'm a Fan of ILibertine 20 fans permalink
photo

Tell those involved with the auto industry about how the economy isn't as bad. Unfortunately, it seems analogous to big steel of the early 80s. That's ontop of NAFTA (job exporting). And I believe the general population's real income is less as compared with the period going into the 80s recession and we didn't have the drag of war expenses ad infinitum and the number of people and businesses leveraging their debt.

No one declared 1937 again. It is, however, wise to contemplate potential pitfalls to a recovery plan and with policy options based upon past experience, I would think.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 PM on 03/14/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

I think many people misunderstand the statement "The GOP lost"

Please allow me to clarify:

The GOP lost our money; 8 billion in Iraq in one shipment.

The GOP lost the confidence of the American People.

The GOP lost their way and as a consequence of their deafness forced us to lose ours.

The GOP lost their ideals

The GOP lost everything that matters

Worse yet though they cannot seem to find any of it and yet want the American people to continue to find it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 03/13/2009
- RonGallion I'm a Fan of RonGallion 19 fans permalink
photo

8 billion and your complaining? Obama will spend 4 Trillion Dollars that is more that every President from George Washington to Bush combined! Obama is gearing up for war in Afghanistan do you think that will cost more than 8 billion, you bet it will and where will you be? I totally agree with you about the Republicans, they have lost their values, they have lost their leadership, and they lost their way. If you ask 100 people who is the Republican Chairman 95 will have no idea. There is virtually no difference between Democrats and Republicans both spend like we have a no limit, and throw it into a bottomless pit. I say in the next election let's vote them all out.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 PM on 03/13/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

$650,000,000,000.00 on Iraq alone.

You live in a partisan world that would not know a fact if it spit in your face which I just did.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 03/14/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 03/14/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

as shol

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 03/14/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

u just pis ed m of

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 03/14/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

Want to misrepresent facts? I can crush you alll day and it is friday night and I am relaxing.

Lies are over.

Truth will rule the day if it kills you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:08 AM on 03/14/2009
- mikep007 I'm a Fan of mikep007 3 fans permalink

Smoot Hawley was written by two Republicans. So Kit Bond admits that GOP ideas hurt us in the 30s. haha

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 PM on 03/13/2009
- miltonista I'm a Fan of miltonista 17 fans permalink

the republicans of the 30's do not resemble the conservatives of today... everyone was enamored with progressivism at the time... and were unaware of the negative consequences of progressive policy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 03/14/2009
photo

What Pelosi means by saying that FDR pulled up too soon with deficit spending is this:

"They stopped spending too soon to make America a Marxist-Leninist socialist republic. We will not make this mistake again."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 PM on 03/13/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

No what she meant was that in 1937 the Dems let the the Repugs change the plan and it caused a recession.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 PM on 03/13/2009
photo

Wasn't unemplyment like 25% going INTO 1937?

Depression Deniers !!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 PM on 03/13/2009

As the Obama Wall Street gang throw our money at the worthless assets of the Wall Street bankers, our creditors are fearful that they may not be repaid or repaid with worthless greenbacks. And we will begin to learn that the stimulus program does not deal with the problem of de-industralization and jobs being hemmoraged from our shores. Even now, the nation's largest bank (JPM) is sending countless service jobs to India. Our industries are continuing to lose tens of thousands of jobs each year to foreign competition. Even our domestic market is being exproppriated by foreign companies, supported by their governments.
FDR made possible the growth of thousands of small manufacturers as the CCC and other government "make work" programs for the unemployed required manufacturing tools, machines and goods to do the extraordinary road building, park building, land re-forestation, dam building, canal digging and other projects that added value to our nation and sustenance to an emerging middle class. Tariffs protected our own domestic industry and labor.
Obama has no plan except the plan to bury our wealth in the bosoms of a corrupt few bankers. Next year people will begin calling him the new Hoover. Unless he changes his policies and quickly.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 PM on 03/13/2009
- slarabee I'm a Fan of slarabee 26 fans permalink
photo

What a joke your view is.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:22 PM on 03/13/2009

You really have no clue do you Slarabee. Themodernleader Is right in his statements. Obama's "stimulus" bill was just a spending bill that Pelosi dreamed up to push her veiws. Obama had little to do with it. He did sign it, with all 8000 ear marks included, just loke he signed the bill this week with 9000 earmarks. 17,000 earmarks after he said he would not allow them...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:37 AM on 03/14/2009
- drizzt396 I'm a Fan of drizzt396 4 fans permalink
photo

"I think Smoot-Hawley, in the view of most historians­...contrib­uted to the worldwide Depression and basically caused a reduction in world trade that was dramatic."

Thanks John. I love how all these right-wingers who love to hate on anything anti-free trade neglect to mention that foreign trade accounted for a miniscule portion of all nations' GDP back in those days, ESPECIALLY when compared with today.

But I wonder how everyone's forgotten Keynes already. Ironically enough, a [very] right wing friend of mine arrived at Keynes' same conclusion (the paradox of thrift) without knowing that Keynes had theorized it at all. Of course, he didn't prescribe massive government spending since the private sector refused to spend. He just wondered how you could force everyone to start spending their money again.

*sigh* if only Paul Krugman, or some other preeminent economist, could bring Keynes back into mainstream consideration. Because all we're hearing is that the government should tighten its belt like ordinary americans do, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S THE PROBLEM. And I don't hear anyone in the media asking them about the Paradox of Thrift.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 PM on 03/13/2009
- drizzt396 I'm a Fan of drizzt396 4 fans permalink
photo

Not too sure as to what exactly that article replies to in my comment...but I did find this choice gem in there.

"Many economists believe overall economic growth slowed to a barely discernible 1% annual rate in the October-December period and will likely weaken even further in the current quarter, raising fears of a possible recession."

As little as 14 months ago, the looming depression was just a "possible recession"

lol

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:26 AM on 03/14/2009
- DanBlather I'm a Fan of DanBlather 11 fans permalink

Hey ! I have blathered two posts.Where are all the whiners ?! blather blather

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 PM on 03/13/2009
- DanBlather I'm a Fan of DanBlather 11 fans permalink

James Carville was right when he said he could get anyone elected by simply walking through every trailer park in america with a handful of hundred dollar bills.It works and is a whole lot cheaper than the three bills that were just signed.blather blather

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 PM on 03/13/2009
- miltonista I'm a Fan of miltonista 17 fans permalink

That sums up the Democrat party since 1932...

They are masters at vote-harvesting. This 'stimulus' bill is like an industrial combine, covering wide swaths of the electorate in one pass.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 AM on 03/14/2009
- DanBlather I'm a Fan of DanBlather 11 fans permalink


I wonder
how long it will take middle class and the poor to realize that consumers eventually pay all the taxes. Enjoy your class envy while you can.

A tax on one is a tax on all

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 PM on 03/13/2009
- DIdaho I'm a Fan of DIdaho 25 fans permalink

I love it that "free market" fanatics don't understand free markets. Your products will earn what the market will bear. You don't have any "right" to pass on taxes, or labor costs, or anything else. If you do, your products will be overpriced and nobody will buy them. Unless, of course, your perfect world fantasies come true and we have a dictatorship of the Randian elite who simply dictate what everybody else will pay.

It doesn't pass the smell test. Unless you believe in a megalithic monopoly economy (which I suspect you want) then a tax on one is by no means a tax on all.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:44 PM on 03/13/2009
- miltonista I'm a Fan of miltonista 17 fans permalink

hehe... it seems you don't understand market economics.

google: market economics 101

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:30 AM on 03/14/2009

If you do not pass on costs where will the profit come from????

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:39 AM on 03/14/2009
- SneathLane I'm a Fan of SneathLane 3 fans permalink

No, actually a tax on the very wealthy is less tax for me. Where did they get that money? By skimming off much more than their fair share of the wealth that's available.

You can't tell me that Bill Gates works a billion times harder than I do - his wealth is mostly due to good fortune and the peculiarities of our economic system, not his intrinsic worthiness. Would he have worked less hard if he'd only made 50 million dollars? No, and he would still have had plenty of money to live on!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 PM on 03/13/2009
- miltonista I'm a Fan of miltonista 17 fans permalink

So explain to me the morality of taking more money from the wealthy, to give to the poor - so they become dependent on a political class... And after doing this for 40 years we see the poor have not improved their condition in pace with economic growth...

Then that political class has the audacity to blame the poor's condition on the wealthy they're taking money from...

Democrats circa 2009

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:28 AM on 03/14/2009
- DanBlather I'm a Fan of DanBlather 11 fans permalink

2010 can't come soon enough for many of us. I believe 2010 and 2012 are going to see a dramatic shift in legislative numbers. Landslides in Reagan-style numbers. Many Americans are seething already having watched their life's savings robbed. Obama has already lost the confidence of many of his most ardent supporters, many of which have ooodles and ooodles of money themselves. They weren't too happy to find out that they were the ones expected to make the biggest sacrifices of all. Wait till the little guy finds out his income is also scheduled for sacrificing too, Obama won't even have Carter's popularity numbers. That's possibly why Carter supported Obama; he knew his own numbers wouldn't be the "worst" to go down in history. Wait until the black people who voted for Obama simply because he was a brother become ashamed of Obama; it'll eventually happen.

And we're only a few months into his Presidency! The next 3 and 2/3 years are going to be an incredibly bumpy ride.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 PM on 03/13/2009
- DIdaho I'm a Fan of DIdaho 25 fans permalink

"I believe 2010 and 2012 are going to see a dramatic shift in legislative numbers. Landslides in Reagan-style numbers."

I agree completely. It'll be great to have a filibuster-proof Senate and a House where we don't have to worry about Republican do-nothings anymore.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:26 PM on 03/13/2009
- miltonista I'm a Fan of miltonista 17 fans permalink

Obama is starting to look remarkably like Jimmy... we're reliving 1977.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 AM on 03/14/2009

You seem to have suffered a few too many bumpy rides. You don't seem to be able to make any sense . . .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 AM on 03/14/2009

What happened to the promise that we the people would have a few days to look at any bill before he'd sign it? it's not like its some obscure routine bill this was huge.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 PM on 03/13/2009
- DIdaho I'm a Fan of DIdaho 25 fans permalink

I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about. The Omnibus spending bill is left over from Bush - people have had months to look at it. The budget has been out for weeks, and nobody's voted yet, let alone signing it. To what are you referring?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:48 PM on 03/13/2009

The 9000 earmarks that Obama said he would not allow. Pelosi had time to come up with a 800billion dollar package, and they did not have time to recraft this bill. Come on, they are going to allow any thing "left over" from Bush. Give me a break...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:42 AM on 03/14/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect