TY - JOUR
T1 - How successful was the new deal? the microeconomic impact of new deal spending and lending Policies in the 1930s
AU - Fishback, Price
N1 - Funding Information:
*University of Arizona. I owe thanks to JEL editors Janet Currie and Steven Durlauf for suggesting that I write the survey and their encouragement and advice throughout the process. My deepest debt is to Shawn Kantor, who asked me to join him in working on the New Deal and has partnered on many of the New Deal projects discussed here. John Wallis has given great advice throughout. I have been taught a great deal by the many scholars cited in the survey. I owe special thanks to all of my New Deal coauthors: Lee Alston, Sule Balkan, Leah Boustan, Joe Cullen, Briggs Depew, Joseph Ferrie, Sebastian Fleitas, Robert Higgs, Alfonso Flores-Lagunes, Michael Haines, Bill Horrace, Ryan Johnson, Valentina Kachanovskaya, Carl Kitchens, Sumner LaCroix, Trevor Kollmann, Gary Libe-cap, Robert Margo, Todd Neumann, Paul Rhode, Jonathan Rose, Randal Rucker, Ken Snowden, Todd Sorensen, Adrian Stoian, Jason Taylor, Melissa Thomasson, Jared Treber, and Werner Troesken. Jim Poterba and Claudia Goldin at the National Bureau of Economic Research helped me set up two conferences on the New Deal with financial support from the Bradley Foundation and the NBER. My own research on the New Deal has benefitted enormously by funding under the following National Science Foundation grants: SES-135744, SES-1061927, SES-0921732, SES 0617972, SES 0214483, SES-0080324, and SBR-9708098. Additional funding for undergraduate research on the New Deal and the states came from the Earhart and Koch Foundations.
PY - 2017/12
Y1 - 2017/12
N2 - The New Deal during the 1930s was arguably the largest peace-Time expansion in federal government activity in American history. Until recently, there had been very little quantitative testing of the microeconomic impact of the wide variety of New Deal programs. Over the past decade scholars have developed new panel databases for counties, cities, and states and then used panel data methods on them to examine the impact of New Deal spending and lending policies for the major New Deal programs. In most cases, the identification of the effect comes from changes across time within the same geographic location after controlling for national shocks to the economy. Many of the studies also use instrumental variable methods to control for endogeneity. The studies find that public works and relief spending had state income multipliers of around one, increased consumption activity, attracted internal migration, reduced crime rates, and lowered several types of mortality. The farm programs typically aided large farm owners but eliminated opportunities for share croppers, tenants, and farm workers. The Home Owners' Loan Corporation's purchases and refinancing of troubled mortgages staved off drops in housing prices and home ownership rates at relatively low ex post cost to taxpayers. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation's loans to banks and railroads appear to have had little positive impact,although the banks were aided when the RFC took ownership stakes. (JEL D72, E61, L52, N41, N42).
AB - The New Deal during the 1930s was arguably the largest peace-Time expansion in federal government activity in American history. Until recently, there had been very little quantitative testing of the microeconomic impact of the wide variety of New Deal programs. Over the past decade scholars have developed new panel databases for counties, cities, and states and then used panel data methods on them to examine the impact of New Deal spending and lending policies for the major New Deal programs. In most cases, the identification of the effect comes from changes across time within the same geographic location after controlling for national shocks to the economy. Many of the studies also use instrumental variable methods to control for endogeneity. The studies find that public works and relief spending had state income multipliers of around one, increased consumption activity, attracted internal migration, reduced crime rates, and lowered several types of mortality. The farm programs typically aided large farm owners but eliminated opportunities for share croppers, tenants, and farm workers. The Home Owners' Loan Corporation's purchases and refinancing of troubled mortgages staved off drops in housing prices and home ownership rates at relatively low ex post cost to taxpayers. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation's loans to banks and railroads appear to have had little positive impact,although the banks were aided when the RFC took ownership stakes. (JEL D72, E61, L52, N41, N42).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038821657&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85038821657&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1257/jel.20161054
DO - 10.1257/jel.20161054
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85038821657
SN - 0022-0515
VL - 55
SP - 1435
EP - 1485
JO - Journal of Economic Literature
JF - Journal of Economic Literature
IS - 4
ER -