Old fallacies die hard.
You would think, for instance, that Americans wouldn't trust Republicans anymore. Poll after poll has shown that the American public holds them responsible for the government shutdown -- and the American public hated the shutdown. Their approval rating plummeted to 21 percent, while President Obama's held steady at 42 percent.
And yet, according to a Pew Research survey released at the end of the shutdown, Americans still believe that Republicans do a "better job dealing with the economy" than Democrats.
Clearly, it will take more than a two-week shutdown to kill the myth that simply won't die.
And it is a myth. Since the government started collecting economic data around World War II, we have accumulated plenty of evidence to measure each party's success at "dealing with the economy" -- and none of it makes Republicans look good.
In their book Presimetrics: What the Facts Tell Us About How the Presidents Measure Up on the Issues We Care About, economist Mike Kimel and journalist Michael E. Kanell use this data to calculate the performance of the economy under every president from Dwight D. Eisenhower to George W. Bush. Here's what they found...
Real GDP per capita. The most basic measure of economic success is the growth of output per person, adjusted for inflation. The fastest growth came in the Kennedy/Johnson years, when "real GDP per capita" grew 3.48 percent per year. The second-fastest came in the Clinton years, a strong 2.49 percent per year. Compare those numbers to laggards like Eisenhower and Bush Sr., who oversaw annual growth of 1.11 percent and 0.93 percent, respectively. When you add up all the Democratic years and all the Republican years, you find that the economy grew 2.82 percent per year under Democratic presidents and 1.54 percent under Republicans.
You may say, "What about the Great Depression? Aren't they cherry-picking numbers by excluding the biggest economic event of the 20th century?" Actually, if you add Hoover, Roosevelt, and Truman, the Democrats' average score goes up, and the Republicans' goes down.
Another common criticism is that presidents inherit the problems of their predecessors. Should we really hold them responsible for the beginning of their term, when the economy's fate is decided largely by the last guy's policies? Fair enough. Let's exclude the first year of each president's term and recalculate the numbers. Guess what? Again, the Democrats' score goes up, and the Republicans' goes down.
Employment-to-population ratio. Instead of focusing on output, we could focus on jobs. Is the economy creating enough jobs to employ the same percentage of the population? Under Democrats, the employment-to-population ratio increased. Under Republicans, it decreased.
Real average weekly earnings. Often, economic growth doesn't translate into the average American's pocketbook. Why not look at weekly wages? Okay. Under Democrats, average weekly earnings, adjusted for inflation, increased. Under Republicans, they decreased.
Real median income. But wages only tell part of the story. Maybe Americans work more hours or get more income from investments. Let's look at the average household -- the "median" -- and see how their inflation-adjusted income changed: Under Democrats, it increased much faster than it did under Republicans.
Real net average disposable income. But Democrats are known for raising taxes (and, indeed, Kimel and Kanell find that the tax burden went higher under Democrats than Republicans). What if all that income growth winds up in the government's pocket, negating the gains? Let's measure average income after taxes: Still, the Democrats oversaw much faster income growth than Republicans!
Poverty rate. Under Democrats, the poverty rate decreased. Under Republicans, it increased.
Real adjusted S&P 500. The stock market grew much faster during Democratic administrations than it did during Republican presidencies.
Value of the dollar. Under Democrats, the dollar appreciated, as foreigners invested more in us. Under Republicans, the dollar depreciated, as foreigners invested less.
Of course, the picture is incomplete. Someday, we will add the completed Obama presidency to the list, and the numbers will change. But already GDP growth under Obama is faster than it was under George W. Bush, and it's only improving. The stock market is surging up, and the shutdown confirmed what the data has proven: Republicans do not do a "better job dealing with the economy."
The longer we believe that fallacy, the more shutdowns and recessions we will invite.
This op-ed was published in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel.