Although Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan were members of the same political party, the two Republican presidents held widely differing political and economic philosophies. This is understandable though due to the essential reversal of roles for the Democratic and Republican parties surrounding the actions of party leaders during the 1930s and 1940s, chiefly led by the conservative sentiment President Roosevelt was leading the country to be dependent on government assistance as opposed to being led by the classic American dream. The root of both of these ideologies is based, for conservative thought, in the belief that the only way to truly be propelled out of poverty or any undesirable situation is to fix the problem mainly by oneself, and for liberal thought, in the belief that man has made government in order to fill the gaps in life that an individual can not fill by him/herself and as such, assistance from the government is the entire point of having the system. The two men made multiple speeches on the topic of economics, and attempted to influence not just the economic system of America, but also the national perception of how the country’s economy should operate. Ideas, applied or not, such as the New Deal, and Trickle Down Economics will forever be associated with the two presidents. Looking back at their policies and beliefs leads way to a greater discussion than one on the proper economic system of the country, it brings about the question of exactly how much action should the federal government take in the lives of American citizens, and to what benefits do government actions lead?

When both FDR and Reagan came into office, the country was facing an economic crisis. Four years prior to Roosevelt’s ascension into the office of the presidency the stock market crash of 1929 hit, and the entire nation went into the largest depression it has endured before or since, with the market declining by approximately 86.1% from the pre-1929 peak to the mid-depression trough. President Reagan came into office in 1981 one year after a 17.1% decline of the same nature, and was forced to fix another 27.1% decline a year after his presidency began with the recession coming in 1982.

When Roosevelt came into office, he benefitted from a reluctant congress and used the extreme national crisis to enact government action to solve any problem that arose, or was already in existence. Along this line he created legislation over the first three years of his first term that focused almost entirely on relief for the struggling population and national economy. While more than a decade after his initial election, the president’s statements in his 1944 State of the Union address reflect his early desire to bolster the economy of the entire country by lifting the nation’s poorest members up alongside the financially better off citizens. Mentioning this even as a solution beyond national borders he said,

“In the present world situation, evidenced by the actions of Germany, Italy, and Japan, unquestioned military control over disturbers of the peace is as necessary among Nations as it is among citizens in a community. And an equally basic essential to peace is a decent standard of living for all individual men and women and children in all Nations. Freedom from fear is eternally linked with freedom from want.” (Roosevelt 1944)

Here, Roosevelt is essentially stating a financially sound public is a major key to preventing wars, not just poverty and starvation. With this statement to congress he also, by putting freedom from want as a means to deter war, is making economic reform the chief priority for the legislative branch. The effects of that prioritization are seen largely through the economic boom attributed to the nation’s use of the G.I. bill over next twenty years after the end of WWII. Before that however, Roosevelt’s first term sought revenue for the nation by repealing prohibition (although the amendment had just been passed as Roosevelt was campaigning for his first election, allowing him to take credit for something he had nothing to do with), and far and wide increasing taxes, especially on the wealthiest citizens. The Revenue Act of 1935 did just that, increasing the tax rate on the upper class from an already high 59 percent to 75 percent. The new revenue for the government would be used to fund national and region specific relief programs, and to grant government assistance to the struggling banks, as was done in the national bank holiday announced on March 5, 1933. In summary, President Roosevelt’s mission relied on forcing the wealthy to prop up the rest of the country, which was a vastly different approach from President Reagan’s attempt to revitalize the economy.

In the general election, presidential nominee Ronald Reagan ran on the economic promise of reviving the economy through tax cuts and deregulation in order to cut the size of the federal government. In the inaugural address, the Gipper stated clearly the importance of moving away from the exact type of direct government action utilized by FDR, saying,

“Idle industries have cast workers into unemployment, human misery, and personal indignity. Those who do work are denied a fair return for their labor by a tax system which penalizes successful achievement and keeps us from maintaining full productivity.

But great as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. For decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children’s future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.” (Reagan 1981)

One of Reagan’s first involvements with congress was the President persuading them to back a policy of supply-side economics, although his request for an immediate thirty percent tax cut across the board wasn’t fulfilled out of fear for the political repercussions of the quick cut helping being seen as favoring the rich. The tax cut scheme that was put into place was a strung out three year process of five, ten, and ten percent increments. Along with the income tax cuts was a drop in the capital gains tax from twenty-eight to twenty percent.

Reagan also firmly believed in and promoted living within one’s means, rather that be for an individual citizen, or for the country. This goal of fiscal responsibility stands in direct contrast to the giant deficits worked under for the majority of Roosevelt’s tenure as president.

The distinction between the actions and plans of the two presidents again comes down to a fundamental ideology on the role of government in society, and the United States specifically. In that inaugural address made by Reagan, he summed up the basis for government and its role, saying,

“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price.” (Reagan, 1981)

The benefit of government will always be determined by the citizens being governed, and its role should be one that does not overshadow or seek to replace the works of those citizens. Government, especially the entity bound by the Constitution of The United States, is again for, by, and of the people.

 

 

Works Cited

Franklin D. Roosevelt: “State of the Union Message to Congress,” January 11, 1944. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=16518.

Ronald Reagan: “Inaugural Address,” January 20, 1981. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=43130.