The government and short-run economic growth

By :: January 31st, 2013

Economic growth estimates released yesterday were not good news: the economy contracted in the fourth quarter for the first time since 2009, albeit by just 0.1 percent. Commentators have mostly attributed the mild contraction to a steep drop in federal defense spending and reduced inventories—each factor cut the quarter’s growth by about 1.25 percent on an annual basis. Those factors are likely temporary and probably won’t drag down future growth unless Congress fails to address the sequester in the next few weeks and defense spending takes a sustained hit.

A less noted problem is the continuing contraction in state and local government spending. State and local government consumption and investment have declined in 12 of the last 14 quarters (see chart). Such a continued contraction is unprecedented since World War II, and is even more surprising considering that these 14 quarters have followed the recession’s trough.


Economic growth over the past two years would have been respectable if not for the drag by local, state, and federal governments. If the government sector had maintained real consumption and gross investment in 2011 and 2012—that is, if its contribution to GDP growth had been zero—overall economic growth in each of those years would have been around 2.5 percent.

Perhaps today’s report will help members of Congress realize that government spending matters for short-run economic growth. Perhaps lawmakers of both parties will see that if the budget stand-off continues, and the deep federal automatic spending cuts now scheduled for March kick in, last quarter’s contraction could turn into a more sustained slump. Perhaps they’ll realize that there may be times for fiscal austerity, but that’s certainly not when our economic recovery is still so weak.


  1. Vivian Darkbloom  ::  12:08 pm on January 31st, 2013:

    “Perhaps today’s report will help members of Congress realize that government spending matters for short-run economic growth. ”

    Of course, but it also matters for medium and long-run economic growth. On the surface, you are simply suggesting that the short-run effects should always outweigh the medium and long-run effects as a matter of policy preference.

    What Congress really needs to realize (i.e. understand) helped by objective support from our non-partisan think tanks, is whether, as an economic matter, short-run benefits exceed medium- and long-term costs. Unfortunately, as far as I know, the economic case is not clear, and thus the answer to that question falls largely to politics. One thing is clear: the short-term *political* case is compelling and Congress needs no help in succumbing to that. But, I thought this was a forum established by the TPC for objective, non-partisan fiscal policy analysis based on economics, and not one for simply repeating un-critcally what are essentially partisan talking points.

  2. Michael Bindner  ::  1:57 pm on January 31st, 2013:

    Sadly, the Majority Party in the House is not good at reacting to bad data that does not support their position, even if doing so would show that the deserve to have a seat at the table.

  3.  ::  10:06 am on July 2nd, 2014:

    I really like reading a post that can make people think. Also,
    thank you for permitting me to comment!

  4.  ::  1:33 am on August 20th, 2014:

    what means xoxo

    For example, in case you were motivated to write a twenty-page paper
    on a subject of your choosing that you did not must research, the recommended quantity of time is really a month.
    If you do not know the guidelines, you’ll not know in case your writing is sensible but other men and women,
    believe me. among,, what name means princess Tip 3:
    Begin the first paragraph with the principle point of one’s message.

    This permits us to exchange requirements over the way within the
    defined scope limit.