How does Obama's economic policy compare to FDR's?

The economic downturn America is digging itself out of has been compared to the Great Depression a multitude of times — so, too, have policy solutions.

The days following Obama’s inauguration in 2009 drew comparison to the infamous first 100 days of FDR’s presidency. FDR’s New Deal policies to save America’s economy during the Great Depression are infamous. Will history look at the Obama administration’s policies in the same light?

The answer is probably not. The New Deal and Obama’s economic policies have two major differences.

A common misconception is that FDR was not a believer in Keynesian economics.

Under this economic school of thought, the government incurs debt to increase spending, thus stimulating the economy and creating jobs. A staple of New Deal policies was that FDR constantly worked toward keeping a balanced budget.

In fact, John Maynard Keynes himself visited FDR trying to convince him to spend more in order to create employment. However, the Democratic four-term president respectively did not oblige.

Obama’s economic policies have utilized Keynesian notions of the government incurring debt. America’s deficit surpassed $14 trillion just this week.

Obviously, America was a much more fiscally responsible place when FDR was in office, but Obama has made it clear he is willing to incur debt to stimulate the economy.

The current president has spent close to $3 trillion in stimulus into the economy via tax cuts, unemployment benefits and his stimulus package. These expenditures have undoubtedly helped the employment situation, but at what cost? FDR was able to create stimulus programs, but do so while incurring a minimum amount of debt.

Another major difference between the two economic policies is the role of the individual.

During the New Deal, the government did get involved and create jobs. These jobs weren’t created through complicated trickle-down means. New Deal job creation was more direct and tangible to Main Street.

The Conservation Corps, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and other work programs created through the New Deal gave citizens an opportunity to work. In return, citizens went to work and created infrastructure that would foster America’s growth of the 1950s. Even a program like Social Security utilized the individual, as you had to work for your Social Security — it wasn’t just a government handout financed by selling bonds abroad.

The Obama administration draws comparison to FDR, given the economic circumstances, but the current administration does not compare to that of FDR. The New Deal was brilliant, and historical and empirical data proves it.

So why, then, do we use Obama’s Keynesian policies and Reagan’s theory on trickle-down economics? The $3 trillion wasted on tax cuts and stimulus packages could have simply created 75 million jobs with a salary of $40,000.

The points FDR took care of were the financial markets and banking system, all the while creating jobs and avoiding a huge incursion of debt.

Why can’t America do this today, or why won’t America do this today?

Richardson’s column runs every other Wednesday. He teaches at Eastern View High School. E-mail dwrich27@gmail.com