It is often stated that people give
presidents receive too much credit or blame for the economy, but the popular
misconception about presidential management of the economy is seldom ever corrected.
As I have noted in earlier posts,
presidents do not manage the economy, as they would in socialist systems, as
the Constitution of the United
States grants relatively little economic
power to the federal government. The
economy is not the responsibility of government. The responsibility of government is to
protect the rights of the people.
Protecting the people from all enemies foreign and domestic is the
primary economic benefit of government.
There are mostly indirect economic
aspects to other federal government policies, but not an economic policy, per
se. The federal government, like other
governments, affects the economy through its fiscal policy (taxing and
spending), but it only represents about one seventh of the economy. The federal government also influences the
economy through regulatory policy (e.g. it is illegal to steal or defraud). Monetary policy affects the economy, but it is
controlled by the Federal Reserve.
Although the Chairman of the “Fed” and its Board members are appointed
by the president, they operate independently of the president and Congress and
their terms of office overlap presidential administrations. One area where the federal government does
have an economic role is in promoting trade because trade is an aspect of
foreign relations. The government makes
trade permissible and obtains favorable terms, but it is up to the people to
make the trades themselves. In short,
although the federal government does not have economic responsibilities, its
policies do have an impact on the economy.
Note I do not refer only to the president, but to the federal government
as a whole because Congress shares responsibility for policies that affect the
economy.
Contrary to the idea that
government’s purpose is to promote the economy, the duty of protecting liberty
necessitates that government harm the economy to some degree in order to allow
commerce to occur freely. For example, taxes
are a drag on economic growth because they remove money from the entire economy
for the operation of government. Regulation
is necessary, but burdensome, even if kept to a minimum. The federal government must impose trade
sanctions on foreign states as part of foreign policy. It is the responsibility of government to
harm the economy as little as possible in accomplishing its end.
A lack of basic knowledge of
economics, the purpose of government and the U.S. Constitution has led many
people to give too much credit or blame to government, especially the federal
government and to presidents in particular, for the state of the economy. Also, they do not acknowledge sufficiently
the affect of various external matters, such as the policy of other governments
(e.g. the States), natural disasters, scientific discoveries, or foreign events
that benefit or harm the economy, making it even more difficult to give all the
credit or blame to the federal government, let alone the president. See also my post from August of 2011, External Influences on the Economy Are an
Excuse for Obama, but not for Bush, http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/08/external-influences-on-us-economy-are.html.
It is a current popular
misconception that somehow President George W. Bush is responsible for the
current recession although few people could identify exactly which of his
policies were supposedly harmful to the economy or why, just as few people
could identify which policies of President Bill Clinton were supposedly
beneficial to the economy until his later compromises with the Republican
Congress to cut taxes.
In my next three posts, I shall discuss
how Bush’s fiscal and trade policies, which President Barack Obama has largely followed, are not responsible for causing the current recession, while identifying its real causes and those long-term Democratic federal government policies that exacerbated it.
No comments:
Post a Comment