When it comes to ranking the worst US presidents in the post-WWII era, Jimmy Carter often found himself at the bottom of the list among conservatives. His tenure was marked by challenges such as high inflation, economic stagnation, weak foreign policy, and a general sense of pessimism about America’s future. However, there are aspects of Carter’s presidency that even free-marketers and conservatives can appreciate.
One notable aspect of Carter’s leadership was his strong stance against deficit spending and his commitment to balanced budgets. As noted by Johns Hopkins historian Joe Renouard, Carter was a fiscal conservative who prioritized careful planning and businesslike management of government finances. Under his watch, the annual federal deficit remained low, the national debt stayed below $1 trillion, and gross federal debt as a percentage of GDP was kept in check.
Carter’s fiscal responsibility was evident in his efforts to eliminate wasteful spending on local projects, a move that reflected his frugal upbringing and experience as a successful farmer. Despite facing challenges in Congress due to his reluctance to engage in traditional legislative negotiations, Carter’s commitment to fiscal discipline was unwavering.
Carter’s legacy also includes his role as a deregulator, earning him the title of “the great deregulator” among libertarians. He championed legislation that deregulated prices and promoted competition in key industries such as airlines, trucking, and energy. These policies led to lower prices, improved services, and even paved the way for the craft beer movement.
In a speech highlighting the importance of deregulation, Carter emphasized the benefits of competition in driving down prices and spurring economic growth. His proactive approach to removing regulatory barriers in various industries set the stage for increased efficiency and innovation.
Despite these positive strides, Carter faced criticism for his handling of inflation and foreign policy challenges. It was only after several years in office that he took decisive action against inflation by appointing Paul Volcker to lead the Federal Reserve. While this move eventually helped curb inflation, the economic downturn that followed contributed to Carter’s political downfall.
One of Carter’s missed opportunities was in the realm of taxation, where he failed to capitalize on a potential tax cut package that could have mirrored Reagan’s later tax reforms. Carter’s reluctance to embrace across-the-board tax cuts underscored his lack of a comprehensive prosperity agenda, ultimately hindering his ability to drive sustained economic growth.
In hindsight, Carter’s presidency was marked by good intentions but a lack of visionary leadership. While he demonstrated fiscal responsibility and deregulatory efforts, his failure to articulate a clear vision for economic prosperity and growth left a void that Reagan would later fill. Americans gravitate towards leaders who inspire confidence and offer a positive outlook on the future, qualities that Carter struggled to embody.
In the end, Carter’s legacy serves as a reminder of the importance of leadership that combines principles with vision and action. While his tenure may have fallen short of greatness in the eyes of many, his contributions to fiscal discipline and deregulation should not be overlooked. Carter’s presidency, though marred by challenges, offers valuable lessons for future leaders seeking to navigate complex economic and political landscapes.
Tyler Watts is a professor of economics and management at Ferris State University.
