February 10, 2005
WHICH FDR?
Paul Krugman's FDR Problem (Nick Schulz, 02/09/2005, Tech Central Station)
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is a great economist (he was awarded the prestigious John Bates Clark medal), but he'd be a much better polemicist if he knew some important facts about Franklin Delano Roosevelt.On Tuesday Krugman wrote in his Times column that President Bush's proposal to change Social Security by creating private accounts was an effort to "undermine the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt." He went on to write:
"Moderates and liberals want to preserve the America F.D.R. built. Mr. Bush and the ideological movement he leads, although they may use F.D.R.'s image in ads, want to destroy it."
Last week my colleague Duane Freese pointed out an extraordinary quote he unearthed uttered by the same FDR whose legacy Mr. Krugman claims President Bush and his ideological confreres are trying to destroy. In a memo to Congress in 1935, FDR said:
"In the important field of security for our old people, it seems necessary to adopt three principles: First, noncontributory old-age pensions for those who are now too old to build up their own insurance. It is, of course, clear that for perhaps 30 years to come funds will have to be provided by the States and the Federal Government to meet these pensions. Second, compulsory contributory annuities that in time will establish a self-supporting system for those now young and for future generations. Third, voluntary contributory annuities by which individual initiative can increase the annual amounts received in old age. It is proposed that the Federal Government assume one-half of the cost of the old-age pension plan, which ought ultimately to be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans." [emphasis added]
That message sounds a lot like what President Bush is proposing today.
FDR enthusiasts argue on the one hand that he saved capitalism via the New Deal but on the other that to apply capitalist methods to New Deal programs would betray his legacy. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 10, 2005 8:04 AM
All political programs are created to fit the needs of the time, and the New Deal was no exception. It should not be fetishized to the extent that it's preserved eternally in the 1930's. Things that made sense then are structural flaws now. The problem is that the Democrats have become the worse kind of conservatives in trying to keep things as they are regardless. I don't trust the Republicans to do what's right, but if the Democrats don't play the game then the GOP is the only game in town.
Posted by: Chris Durnell at February 10, 2005 11:05 AMWho, save for Arthur Meier Schlesinger, Jr., cares what FDR would think, say, or do?
Posted by: Luciferous at February 10, 2005 1:18 PMLuciferous;
It's particularly deadly to quote the other guy's expert against him, regardless of whether you believe the expert.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at February 10, 2005 1:59 PMoj,
My suspect memory informs me there is a surfeit of current scholarship showing the "icon" FDR's policies not only extended the so-called Great Depression but also deepened it.
Mike