a smart C-J letter writer on the New Deal

Finally, as I wrap up my comments on the Great Depression and the New Deal (a pretty good topic for April 1, huh?), an outstanding letter to the editor of the C-J from Gary Owen of Louisville, commenting on a book review...

Book reviews usually reflect a critic's bias at some point, and Roger Miller wastes no time in his piece in the Saturday books page on Nick Taylor's recent history of the Works Progress Administration during the Great Depression. His casual dismissal of the criticism of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal policies reveals an intellectual dishonesty that is easy to demonstrate.

Any diligent student of American economic history can find plenty of evidence to support the tepid effect of New Deal policies. Based on U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the unemployment rate in 1939 (six years into the New Deal) was over 17 percent. Per capita GDP and personal consumption were lower in 1939 than in 1929. Net private investment was a negative $3.1 billion from 1930-40. Does that sound like successful policy?

Miller can make a powerful argument that the New Deal provided the emotional catharsis for America in her darkest hour -- but not an economic lift. A country on the brink of civil disorder needed a leader who thought out of the box in dire circumstances, and FDR was exactly the man. If you focus on his New Deal efforts to reconstitute the Supreme Court or to use deficit spending to fund public projects to put men to work or to hijack private American ownership of gold currency -- you will find one consistent theme. Something drastic had to be done to appear as if the government could ultimately solve the dilemma and maintain order.

Students of American history must continually confront the reasons and explanations for the occurrence of the Great Depression in order to understand the risks inherent in a modern day economic colossus like the United States. Defenders of New Deal policies who overlook the economic performance of those strategies do a terrible disservice to honest debate on the subject.