Repairing The Job Machine More jobs might be created this year than
during George W. Bush's presidency.
by Ronald Brownstein - National Journal - May 15, 2010
If the economy produces jobs over the next eight months at the
same pace as it did over the past four months, the nation will have
created more jobs in 2010 alone than it did over the entire eight years
of George W. Bush's presidency.
That comparison comes with many footnotes and asterisks. But it shows
how the economic debate between the parties could look very different
over time -- perhaps by November, more likely by 2012. More important,
the comparison underscores the urgency of repairing an American
job-creation machine that was sputtering long before the 2008 financial
meltdown.
First, the numbers: From February 2001, Bush's first full month in
office, through January 2009, his last, total U.S. nonfarm employment
grew from 132.5 million to 133.5 million, according to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. That's an increase, obviously, of just 1 million.
>From January through April of this year, the economy created 573,000
jobs. Over a full year, that projects to 1.72 million jobs.
Job-creation numbers are notoriously volatile, so the actual result
could run above or below that estimate. But Obama administration
economists are increasingly optimistic that job growth this year will
exceed expectations. Few of them will be surprised if more jobs are
created in 2010 than over Bush's two terms.
Now the principal footnote: To compare job growth in 2010 with Bush's
record ignores the nearly 4 million jobs lost in Obama's first year,
during the freefall that began in Bush's final months. That's like
ignoring a meteor strike.
Over time, voters are likely to judge Obama by his degree of success in
eliminating that deficit and reducing unemployment. Still, if the
economy this year produces more than 1 million jobs -- or, conceivably,
more than 2 million -- that will give Democrats more ammunition to
argue that their agenda has started to turn the tide.
The real point of looking again at Bush's record is to underscore how
few jobs the economy was creating even before the 2008 collapse.
Bush's tally of 1 million jobs was much less than the economy had
generated during any other two-term stretch since World War II: Dwight
Eisenhower produced nearly 4 million, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson
(together) almost 16 million, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford (together)
11 million, Ronald Reagan 16 million, and Bill Clinton more than 22
million.
Bush's total, of course, was suppressed by the slowdown he inherited
from Clinton and the full-scale meltdown during his last year. But even
during the recovery in between, job growth lagged.
In only eight of Bush's 96 months did the economy create as many jobs
as the 290,000 it did last month. Clinton exceeded that level 33 times.
Reagan exceeded it 24. In all, the economy gained about 1.2 million
jobs annually during the six years of recovery under Bush. It averaged
about twice that during the expansion from March 1991 to February 2001.
This record suggests two conclusions. One is that there's no evidence
to support the argument from congressional Republicans that tax cuts
offer a silver bullet for expanding employment. Job growth boomed after
Reagan cut taxes, but expanded even faster after Clinton raised them,
and then faltered despite two massive tax cuts under Bush. If tax rates
are the critical factor in that record, the relationship is well
disguised.
The other point is that even optimistic scenarios suggest a sustained
period of uncomfortably high joblessness. The economy lost more jobs
during 2008 and 2009 than it gained throughout the Bush recovery.
Obama administration officials see positive signs of the economy's
reaching what one called "escape velocity," but acknowledge a long
tough climb, even under relatively hopeful projections, to recreate the
jobs vaporized by the recession. It is possible that the economy could
experience a full decade without any sustained period matching the rapid
job growth of the late 1990s. Obama himself has privately described
long-term unemployment as his greatest domestic concern.
Although the immediate jobs picture is clearly brightening, lasting
surges in U.S. job growth usually have followed technological
breakthroughs (the personal computer, the Internet) or expanded access
to education (mass primary schooling in the late 19th century and
increased access to college after World War II). Obama is betting
heavily on both fronts, with big increases in federal investment in
education and new technologies, such as alternative energy. But the
engine that will propel the next great burst of American job creation
has yet to be discovered.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/nj_20100515_5237.php?mrefid=si\
te_search
