Van Ens wants us to believe the decade of
the 1980s was one long consumption binge, fostered by the Reagan Administration
and characterized by what political pundit Kevin Phillips called
"conspicuous opulence" by the rich and powerful to the
detriment of the poor and down trodden.
However, this popular leftist canard doesn’t stand up to the facts.
Measured by giving, the 1980s were not the
"Decade of Greed" at all. On the contrary, charitable giving by
individuals and corporations jumped dramatically. This finding holds for giving
measured not just in absolute terms, but also in total real dollars
contributed, real charitable contributions per capita, and charitable
contributions relative to national income.
Indeed, giving in the 1980s was above the
level that would have been predicted from the upward trend established in the
25 years prior to 1980. This conclusion holds even after adjusting for several
economic and policy changes that might reasonably be expected to have boosted
charitable contributions. In view of total, aggregate giving from 1955 to 1989,
the 1980s in America were actually a decade of unusual generosity.
With his leftist viewpoint, Van Ens sees
the wealthy and corporations as sinful by nature, and he describes Americans as
“bedazzled” by Reagan’s rhetoric calling America a shining city on the
hill. Van Ens tries to make the case
that this successful decade was “shorn of sacrifice” for the common good. The
truth is that corporate giving in real terms rose during the period increasing
in the 1980s at a compound rate of 4.1 per cent. Charitable contributions by
corporations as a percentage of profits before and after taxes remained higher
in the late 1980s than in the decades preceding.
The unusual surge in giving in the 1980s
could be explained in part by favorable changes in economic conditions during
the decade. It might be said that Americans were giving more not because they
were more charitable, but because they had higher incomes and varying tax
rates.
Were the 1980s really the “Decade of
Greed" as claimed by Van Ens and often decried by his fellow leftists? In terms of charitable contributions, the
answer is a resounding "No."
No matter how the record of giving is measured, the 1980s were in fact a
decade of renewed charity, generosity, and civic virtue.
As documented in a study by scholar Denish
D’Souza, Reagan saved America from a dire economics: he brought inflation down
from 13.5 to 4.1 percent; unemployment, from 9.5 to 5.2 percent; the federal
discount rate, from 14 to 6.5 percent. Under Reagan, the number of jobs
increased by almost 20 million; median family income rose every year from 1982
to 1989. It was the greatest peacetime expansion in American history.
Charitable giving more than doubled, to more than $100 billion in 1988.
Van Ens wants his readers to believe that
Reagan presided over vast giveaways to the rich. In fact, during the 1980s, the affluent paid
more in federal taxes than ever before. Even though the top marginal tax rate
declined from 70% to 28%, the proportion of taxes collected from the top 1% of
income-earners went from 18% of all revenues in 1981 to 28% in 1988. The top 5%
of earners bore 35% of the tax burden in 1981. In 1988, Reagan’s last year in
office, they paid 46%. Meanwhile the tax share of middle- and lower-income
Americans declined.
Van Ens buys into the liberal myth that the
affluent forgot about their obligations to the less-well-off during the Reagan
years. In reality, the well-off not only
paid more in taxes but also gave more in charity. The Reagan era saw the
greatest outpouring of private generosity in history. Americans, who
contributed around $65 billion (as measured in 1990 dollars) to charity in 1980
gave more than $100 billion annually by the end of the decade, a real increase
of 54%. The average American, who gave $340 to charity in 1980, raised his or
her contribution to $486 in 1990.
Economist Richard McKenzie calculated that
the rate of increase in charitable contributions was greater than at any
previous time in the postwar era. Moreover, he observes, it was greater than
the growth of expenditures on personal extravagances like jewelry purchases,
eating out and health club memberships.
Nor did Americans merely contribute money:
More people volunteered their time for churches and civic groups than ever
before. Van Ens also fails to recognize
the sacrifices made by countless American citizens who contributed their time
and money to community organizations.
This uncontested fact is conveniently omitted from Van Ens’ descriptions
of the 1980s as an era of greed.
As reported in the Chronicle of
Philanthropy, spending on programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, grew rapidly.
As a result, and to the consternation of some conservative supporters of the
Reagan administration, government payments continued to account for roughly
one-third of nonprofit revenue.
Van Ens completely misses the mark due to
his grave mischaracterization of Reagan and historical misrepresentation of the
facts. His caricature of President
Reagan is shameful and deserves wide condemnation. In terms of civic virtue, it should be
remembered that Reagan was one of the three great liberators in American
history. Abraham Lincoln helped
emancipate African Americans from slavery; Franklin Roosevelt help wrest
Western Europe from fascism’ Ronald Reagan helped liberate Eastern Europe from
communism. Regan succeeded in liberating
people from tyranny which is an international act of civic virtue of the
highest order.
He also fails to recognize the acts of
civic virtue that were shown daily by our military forces which served nobly
and often made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of their fellow citizens during
the 1980s.
Deeply embedded in American liberalism is a
sense that only the government can properly help the less fortunate. Liberals
such as Van Ens believe that more government spending is always in order, but
they fail to account for works of personal charity. Van Ens misses the point Reagan made in his
1981 inaugural address: "How can we love our country and not love our sick
countrymen, and loving them, reach out a hand when they fall, heal them when
they are sick, and provide opportunities to make them self-sufficient?"
I had the honor to serve as a military
social aide at the White House during the 1980s, and I spent many hours next to
President Reagan and observed his interactions with world leaders and common
citizens, and I can personally attest that he was a thoroughly decent gentleman
who cared deeply for his country and all its citizens. His character was beyond reproach and it is
sad to see his integrity maligned. Reagan was the embodiment of civic virtue,
and he was an inspiring leader of an exceptional country composed of
compassionate citizens contributing to the greater good of society.
