|
|
Reducing Poverty: Track Record of Democrats vs. Republicans
Several articles in the past few years have analyzed Democratic and Republican
administrations, comparing standard measures of national economic health -
production, unemployment, inflation, the stock market, etc. - and standard measures of
government efficiency - amount of Federal spending, number of Federal employees,
deficit reduction, etc.
Remarkably, by every one of these measures of economic health and government efficiency, the
analyses show that Democratic administrations, on average, outperform Republican
administrations.
Anyone who is interested in looking at comparisons of
economic performance and government
efficiency during Democratic and Republican administrations should take a few minutes
to read these articles; they are all interesting and short:
One economic measure these articles don't address is poverty. If Democratic
administrations are associated with better economic conditions, as these articles
indicate, then it's reasonable to expect this fact to be reflected in a greater reduction of
poverty under Democratic leadership.
To test this assumption, I examined the U.S. Census poverty data for the years 1961
through 2000. As Dwight Meredith noted in his articles, this
period lets us compare 20 years of Democratic administrations and 20 years of
Republican administrations.
(The Census poverty data
currently available actually runs from 1959 through 2006.
However, if we include the Republican years 1959-1960 and 2001-2006 in
the analysis, it makes the averages even worse for Republicans; thus the
choice
not to include those years in the analysis certainly does not
bias the results against Republicans.)
Examining the Census data, what I found was this: during the 20 years of Republican
administrations, each year on average the number of Americans living below the
poverty line rose by 416,400, while during the 20 years of Democratic administrations,
each year on average this number fell by 829,900.
I then applied the analysis suggested in Michael Kinsley's article:
I credited each year's
performance to the previous year's administration.
In this analysis, during the years credited to
Republican administrations, the number of Americans below the poverty line rose
371,095 on average each year, while during the years credited to Democratic
administrations, this number fell 845,421 on average each year.
The performance results also favor Democrats if we look at the poverty
rate - the percent of the total population below the poverty line. The poverty rate fell on
average 0.58 percent each year of Democratic administrations, while poverty rose on
average 0.036 percent each year of Republican administrations. If we assign credit to
the previous year's administration, the poverty rate fell on average 0.59 percent each
year credited to Democratic administrations, and rose on average 0.012 percent each
year credited to Republican administrations.
The second chart below ranks presidential administrations according to the net change in the
national poverty rate that occurred during their administration (George W. Bush's first
term is also included, for comparison.)
We see that the poverty rate declined during all but one Democratic administration,
while the poverty rate increased during all but one Republican administration. The
period of recent history that saw, by far, the most dramatic poverty reduction was
1961-1969. Yet Republicans to this day deride Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty." What a
pity for our country that one of America's great success stories - the 1960's anti-poverty
effort - has been grossly mischaracterized as a failure - and that so
many Americans now believe this false story about their country rather than the truth.
While it's often said that past performance is no guarantee of future performance, it does
seem as if history may be a pretty good predictor of the performance of Democratic and
Republican administrations. Poverty began rising under George W. Bush's administration,
following eight straight years of falling rates under the Clinton administration.
Average Yearly Change in U.S. Poverty Levels, 1961-2000
|
Period
|
Average Yearly Change
|
|
Number of People Below
Poverty Line
|
Percent of Population Below
Poverty Line (Poverty Rate)
|
|
All 40 Years
|
Down 206,750
|
Down 0.27
|
Democratic
Administrations
(20 Years)
1961-63, JFK
1964-68, LBJ
1977-80, JC
1993-00, BC
|
Down 829,900
|
Down 0.58
|
Republican
Administrations
(20 Years)
1969-74, RN
1975-76, GF
1981-88, RR
1989-92, GB
|
Up 416,400
|
Up 0.036
|
Change in U.S. Poverty Levels During Each
Presidential Administration Since 1961,
Ordered By Reduction of Poverty Rate
|
Administration
|
Change During Administration
|
|
Number of People Below
Poverty Line
|
Percent of Population Below
Poverty Line (Poverty Rate)
|
Johnson 1964-1968
|
Down 11,047,000
|
Down 6.61
|
Clinton 1993-2000
|
Down 6,433,000
|
Down 3.50
|
Kennedy 1961-1963
|
Down 3,415,000
|
Down 2.74
|
Nixon 1969-1974
|
Down 2,019,000
|
Down 1.69
|
Reagan 1981-1988
|
Up 2,473,000
|
Up 0.03
|
Ford 1975-1976
|
Up 1,605,000
|
Up 0.60
|
Carter 1977-1980
|
Up 4,297,000
|
Up 1.25
|
Bush II (first term) 2001-2004
|
Up 5,416,000
|
Up 1.41
|
Bush I 1989-1992
|
Up 6,269,000
|
Up 1.78
|
|
Now is the Time
to Act
|
Days
Until
|
Election
Day
|
|
237
|
2010
|
|
972
|
2012
|
Why Eradicating
Poverty is on the Short List
Why Energy Independence
is on the Short List
Hot-Button Issues
Spotlight-Worthy
Reducing Poverty:
Track Record of Democrats vs. Republicans
Why Democrats
Do Better
Two Lessons of 9/11
External Links
Franklin Roosevelt's Short List by Cass SunsteinGreat Society's Great Legacy by Joseph A. Califano, Jr. Another Reason Why Democrats Do Better by Digby Democratic "Markers" Earning the respect of voters Round Two: New Ideas for Eradicating Poverty in America by Ezra Klein The Millenium Goals: A Practical Plan to End Extreme Poverty Worldwide by Jeffrey Sachs Avoiding Catastrophic Climate Change Requires Can-Do Leadership by DarkSyde Apollo Alliance Speaking out for a bold energy policy
|