Jewish World Review July 26, 2002 /17 Menachem-Av, 5762

Jeff Jacoby

Jeff Jacoby
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Another round of Kemp-Roth | Twenty-five years ago this month, Congressman Jack Kemp of New York and Senator William Roth of Delaware first introduced a bill to dramatically cut income tax rates across the board. They argued, contrary to conventional wisdom, that chopping tax rates would lead to a great surge of productivity and growth and revive the country's listless, limping economy.

Congress and President Carter rejected their idea, and the economy worsened. By 1980, inflation was running at 13.5 percent, mortgage rates hit 20 percent, and unemployment was at a postwar high. When he ran against Gerald Ford in 1976, Carter excoriated him for a "misery index" -- inflation plus unemployment -- of 13. Four years later, the misery index had topped 20. America found itself, said Newsweek in January 1981, in "the most dangerous economic crisis since Franklin Roosevelt took office 48 years ago."

Fortunately, Ronald Reagan saw the promise in the Kemp-Roth proposal and made it a key plank in his campaign for the presidency. On Aug. 15, 1981, less than seven months after being sworn in, he signed Kemp-Roth into law. It was the cornerstone of what would prove the most successful economic policy in modern American history. It launched a boom that would last, save only a shallow eight-month turndown in 1991-92, until the end of the century.

The Reagan expansion vastly increased the nation's wealth. "In 1982 the Dow Jones hit a low point of 792," Stephen Moore, the economist and president of the Club for Growth, wrote last year. "When Reagan left office, the market had more than tripled in value. Then it tripled again over the next 10 years." Even after the selloff of recent weeks, the Dow today is worth 10 times what it was before Kemp-Roth-Reagan began to work its magic.

Of course it wasn't really magic. What Reagan understood, as Kemp and Roth had understood, is that human beings will work harder and invest more of their time and money if, at the margin, they are allowed to keep more of what they earn. Before Reagan entered the White House, the highest marginal tax rate on ordinary income was 50 percent; on "unearned" income (i.e., interest and dividends), 70 percent; on capital gains, 35 percent. All those rates fell to 28 percent during his tenure in office. And as they fell, incentives climbed: the incentive to work longer hours, to invest in a new business, to expand an existing one, to buy some stock, to develop a piece of real estate, or to just put money in the bank.

Reagan's conviction that tax cuts would stimulate the economy was derided by economists who predicted it would make inflation worse and do nothing to stimulate production. The first George Bush, before becoming Reagan's vice president, mocked Kemp-Roth as "voodoo economics." The mockery increased during the recession of 1992, which was brought on by the Federal Reserve's policy -- supported by Reagan -- of stifling inflation by restricting the money supply.

"The stench of failure hangs over Ronald Reagan's White House," The New York Times intoned in January 1983. "The economic nostrums he brought to office have not had the predicted effect. Only by recognizing his errors will he find better ideas."

He chose instead to stay the course, and within months, the economy had turned around for good.

The success of Reaganomics was obvious to the American people, who re-elected the Gipper in a landslide, then handily elected Bush in 1988. But that hasn't stopped Reagan's critics from continuing to wrinkle their noses at that "stench of failure." The Reagan tax cuts drained the Treasury and caused huge deficits, they say. Reaganomics was a boon for the greedy rich but hell on everyone else, they say.

Neither charge is true. Far from draining the Treasury, Reagan's policies sent federal revenues surging. The government's take doubled from $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990 -- an inflation-adjusted increase of 28 percent.

Unfortunately, spending climbed even faster. Congress routinely declared Reagan's budgets "dead on arrival" and insisted on spending more than he requested. While revenues climbed 28 percent, expenditures climbed 36 percent. Excessive spending, not lower tax rates, ballooned the deficit.

As for the question of who gained from Reaganomics, the record is just as clear. Some 18 million jobs were created under Reagan, and every segment of the population, from the richest quintile to the poorest, gained in income. The rich got richer -- but they also shouldered a significantly greater share of the tax burden. By the time Reagan left office, the top 1 percent of taxpayers, who were pocketing 14 percent of the nation's income, were paying 25 percent of all federal income taxes. When he came to office, they had been paying just 18 percent.

What worked in the 1980s would work today, when tax rates are again too high (the top rate is now 39 percent). Last year's tax cut, which slo-o-owly lowers rates a few percentage points over the course of a decade, then jacks them all back up overnight, will do little to stimulate the economy. But accelerate those cuts, deepen them, and make them permanent, and the economy would charge forward once more. Now as always, the key to enterprise and growth is incentive, and incentive was the very heart of Reaganomics.

If you yearn to see the bulls back on Wall Street, you ought to be calling for another injection of Kemp-Roth. For turning a 97-pound weakling of an economy into Charles Atlas, there's nothing better.

Like this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

Jeff Jacoby is a Boston Globe columnist. Comment by clicking here.

07/19/02: Jews among Arabs, Arabs among Jews
07/15/02: Musings, random and otherwise
07/12/02: The new civil rights champions
07/03/02: Riding the rails
07/01/02: The prerequisite to peace
06/24/02: Frisking AlGore
06/17/02: Offense, not defense, is the key to homeland security
06/14/02: Looking at the horror
06/07/02: The cost of a death-penalty moratorium
06/03/02: Executing 'children,' and other death-penalty myths
05/29/02: A real threat?
05/24/02: The message in Arafat's headdress
05/20/02: (Mis)playing the popularity card
05/10/02: Outspoken, Muslim -- and moderate
05/10/02: The heroes in Castro's jails
05/06/02: The disappearing history term paper
05/03/02: Musings, random and otherwise
04/29/02: The canary in Europe's mine
04/15/02: Powell's crazy mission
04/12/02: The slavery reparations hustle
04/08/02: Peace at any price = war
03/26/02: Decency matters most, Caleb
03/22/02: The U.S. embargo and Cuba's future
03/19/02: The keepers of Cuba's conscience
03/15/02: A walk in Havana
02/26/02: Buchanan's lament
02/12/02: What 'peace' means to Arafat
02/05/02: Antismoking: Who pays?
02/01/02: Turn the Saudis
01/25/02: Making MLK cry
01/21/02: Ted to tax cut: Drop dead
01/18/02: Musings random and otherwise
01/14/02: An ultimatum to Saudi Arabia
01/11/02: Friendship, Saudi-style
01/07/02: Shakedown at Harvard
01/04/02: More guns, more safety
01/02/02: Smears and slanders from the Left
12/28/01: Congress gives to others -- and itself
12/24/01: The littlest peacemakers
12/20/01: How to condemn terror
12/18/01: Greenland once was
12/14/01: Parents who never said ''no''
12/11/01: Wit and (economic) wisdom
12/04/01: The war against Israel goes on
11/30/01: Tribunals, motorcycles -- and freedom
11/19/01: Friendship and the House of Saud
11/12/01: The Justice Department's unjust monopoly
11/09/01: Muslim, but not extremist
11/02/01: Too good for Oprah
10/29/01: Journalism and the 'neutrality fetish'
10/26/01: Derail these subsidies
10/22/01: Good and evil in the New York Times
10/15/01: Rush Limbaugh's ear
10/08/01: With allies like these
10/01/01: An unpardonable act
09/25/01: Speaking out against terror
09/21/01: What the terrorists saw
09/17/01: Calling evil by its name
09/13/01: Our enemies mean what they say
09/04/01: The real bigots
08/31/01: Shrugging at genocide
08/28/01: Big Brother's privacy -- or ours?
08/24/01: The mufti's message of hate
08/21/01: Remembering the 'Wall of Shame'
08/16/01: If I were the editor ...
08/14/01: If I were the Transportation Czar ...
08/10/01: Import quotas 'steel' from us all
08/07/01: Is gay "marriage" a threat?
08/03/01: A colorblind nominee
07/27/01: Eminent-domain tortures
07/24/01: On protecting the flag ... and drivers ... and immigrants
07/20/01: Dying for better mileage
07/17/01: Why Americans would rather drive
07/13/01: Do these cabbies look like bigots?
07/10/01: 'Defeated in the bedroom'
07/06/01: Who's white? Who's Hispanic? Who cares?
07/02/01: Big(oted) man on campus
06/29/01: Still appeasing China's dictators
06/21/01: Cuban liberty: A test for Bush
06/19/01: The feeble 'arguments' against capital punishment
06/12/01: What energy crisis?
06/08/01: A jewel in the crown of self-government
05/31/01: The settlement myth
05/25/01: An award JFK would have liked
05/22/01: No Internet taxes? No problem
05/18/01: Heather has five mommies (and a daddy)
05/15/01: An execution, not a lynching
05/11/01: Losing the common tongue
05/08/01: Olympics 2008: Say no to Beijing
05/04/01: Do welfare mothers a kindness: Make them work
05/01/01: Another man's child
04/24/01: Sharon should have said no
04/02/01: The Inhumane Society
03/30/01: To have a friend, Caleb, be a friend
03/27/01: Is Chief Wahoo racist?
03/22/01: Ending the Clinton appeasement
03/20/01: They're coming for you
03/16/01: Kennedy v. Kennedy
03/13/01: We should see McVeigh die
03/09/01: The Taliban's wrecking job
03/07/01: The No. 1 reason to cut taxes
03/02/01: A Harvard candidate's silence on free speech
02/27/01: A lesson from Birmingham jail
02/20/01: How Jimmy Carter got his good name back
02/15/01: Cashing in on the presidency
02/09/01: The debt for slavery -- and for freedom
02/06/01: The reparations calculation
02/01/01: The freedom not to say 'amen'
01/29/01: Chavez's 'hypocrisy': Take a closer look
01/26/01: Good-bye, good riddance
01/23/01: When everything changed (mostly for the better)
01/19/01: The real zealots
01/16/01: Pardon Clinton?
01/11/01: The fanaticism of Linda Chavez
01/09/01: When Jerusalem was divided
12/29/00 Liberal hate speech, 2000
12/15/00Does the Constitution expect poor children be condemned to lousy government schools?
12/08/00 Powell is wrong man to run State Department
12/05/00 The 'MCAS' teens give each other
12/01/00 Turning his back on the Vietnamese -- again
11/23/00 Why were the Pilgrims thankful?
11/21/00 The fruit of this 'peace process' is war
11/13/00 Unleashing the lawyers
11/17/00 Gore's mark on history
40 reasons to say NO to Gore

© 2002, Boston Globe