Economic Stimulus Appropriations Act of 1977

Last updated
Economic Stimulus Appropriation Act
Great Seal of the United States (obverse).svg
Long titleAn Act making economic stimulus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1977, and for other purposes
Enacted bythe 95th United States Congress
EffectiveMay 13, 1977
Citations
Public law 95-29
Statutes at Large 91 Stat. 122
Legislative history

The Economic Stimulus Appropriations Act of 1977 was a stimulus package enacted by the 95th Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on 13 May 1977. [1] Developed in response to the longest and deepest economic recession post World War II, the primary objective of the stimulus package was to provide the economy with a boost.

Contents

The bill's rationale was based on Keynesian economic theory, providing tax reductions and increasing jobs to boost private spending, preventing the economy from any further slowdown. [2] The approximate cost of the bill was estimated to be $20.1 billion spread across 1977 and 1978, [1] where the act helped to create 9.3 million jobs, the largest increase in job creation for any presidency. The act was a contributing factor to stagflation, which was apparent when Carter took over the office but worsened towards the end of his term. [3]

The politics around the stimulus made the act highly controversial. The Republicans felt that the act was overcompensating, while on the left, many Democrats felt that the act was not doing enough and was not big enough. Economist Milton Friedman argued that the tax cut would have little effect on consumption and GDP. [4]

Initial bill

President Carter announced that unemployment would be his primary concerns when he entered office on January 20, 1977. [5] The Economic Stimulus Appropriation Act was initially introduced as a $31.1 billion fiscal stimulus package. The package was drafted by Treasury Secretary W. Michael Blumenthal; Charles L. Schultze, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers; and Budget Director Bert Lance. [6] The bill was immediately met with mixed responses, with many suggesting that it was a "minimax solution". [7] The initial bill had two components; the first part included a tax cut for both households and businesses, accompanied by a simple tax rebate of $50 which would be given to all citizens. The goal of this component would be to provide a boost for the slowing economy. The second part was an extensive job program, that would help with job creation to tackle the growing unemployment. [8]

Legislative history

A week after President Carter took office, aides of Carter began to appear in front of committees of Congress, explaining the contents of the stimulus package. The components of the act were developed during the transitional period before Carter was inaugurated. [9]

House of Representatives

The House version of the bill was introduced on 10 March 1977. It was sponsored by Democrat George H. Mahon, the chairman of the United States House Committee on Appropriations. On 4 May 1977, the House passed the bill by a 281-126 vote. [10]

Senate

The Senate version of the bill was introduced on 17 March 1977; this version of the bill was heavily criticized as it saw the removal of the $50 tax rebate and the tax cut for businesses. Charles L. Schultze, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, justified the removal claiming that the economy appeared to be more stimulated than anticipated and the provisions were redundant. [6]

Although both parties were unhappy with the original provisions, Carter faced further criticism after announcing that the $50 tax rebate and business tax credits would be removed from the bill. [5] This time the criticism came from both the Democrats and Republicans from the Senate Budget Committee. The Democratic Senator, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Edmund S. Muski and Republic Senator Henry S. Bellmon condemned the sudden removal. Senator Bellmon said by withdrawing the cornerstone of his stimulus package; the President has left the budget process "with egg on its face." In response to these statements, Michael Blumenthal defended the removal by stating that there was a growing belief within the team that leaving the rebate in would be "unwise". [11]

The initial bill also included a $50 per person tax rebate, which Carter proposed during his campaign, claiming that it would better help stimulate the economy. A temporary business tax cut was also included, providing small businesses with an opportunity to reduce their payroll. These provisions were introduced to help improve demand and boost the economy. However, they were faced with heavy criticism when introduced to the House committee, arguing the impact of the rebate and considerations for more favorable alternatives such as a permanent tax cut. [12] The provision's removal was faced with heavy criticism from both sides of the party, as Congress had to amend its 1977 budget process in order to integrate the bill. The withdrawal was deemed by many as "a body blow to the Congressional budget process". [11]

Despite the discontent, Senate voted, 63 - 15 to end the debate on the bill and advanced it on May 2, 1977. [10]

Conference report

The congressional negotiators reported that the Conference Report was completed on 3 May 1977. The House Majority Leader Robert Byrd scheduled a vote on the bill the next day. On 4 May, the House agreed to the Conference Report, 326 - 87. The reported was passed by the majority except for 17 Democrats voted for the bill, and 70 Republicans voted against it (19 congress members did not vote). [13]

The Senate passed the Conference Report on 5 May 1977. [10]

Presidential signing

Jimmy Carter signing the Economic Appropriations Act. Jimmy Carter bill signing ceremony.gif
Jimmy Carter signing the Economic Appropriations Act.

On 13 May 1977, President Carter hosted 25 mayors from the country's most financially struggling cities to watch him sign the $20.1 billion bill into law. The signing ceremony was held at the White House Rose Garden. [1]

Provisions of the act

The following are the main features of the bill:

Public service employment

Tax reduction

Public works projects

Regular revenue-sharing program

Job creation program

Job Corps Training Center, Wellfleet Job Corps Training Center, Wellfleet.jpg
Job Corps Training Center, Wellfleet

Under the stimulus package, it provided further support and funding for the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA), which was aimed to provide training for workers and jobs in the public sector. The added funds helped to expand the role and capacity of the Job Corps, a program operated by the Department of Labor that provided education and vocational training to youths between the age of 16 to 24. The bill assisted the program to open new residential centers and increased its capacity from 22,000 to 30,000. Additionally, there was also an increase in funding for the program, providing it with $274 million. [15]

Additional funding was also given to programs to help train unskilled workers such as the Skill Training Improvement Program (STIP), a program that provides training to low-income and unskilled workers, especially to those located in rural regions and Native Americans. [15]

A few programs were created as part of the stimulus to help boost the employment rate. The Veterans HIRE (Help through Industry Retraining and Employment) program was formed to train and hire veterans. Focusing on decrease the unemployment rate among veterans, with the program prioritizing those that are disabled or were involved in the Vietnam War. [16]

Under Carter's administration, the government formed the largest public service job program, adding a total of 9.8 million jobs during his presidency. A 10.9% increase in employment during his four-year tenure. [17]

Recommendations by economists

Initially, when the bill was first introduced, Arthur F. Burns, the Federal Reserve Board chairman, was critical of President Carter's economic program. Burns targeted the $50 tax rebate, stating that the reserve does not have enough money and would not be the most effective method in stimulating the economy. In turn, he suggested that the government reduce levies in corporate tax, and public employment should only be established as a last resort. [18]

The New York Times commented on President Carter for attempting to please all sides. In a news analysis piece, they wrote, "He was in truth the very model of an agreeable man." This statement was to criticize Carter of only surrounding himself with people who agreed with him and at the same time, agreed with all the advice that he received from others. [19]

Professor Milton Friedman of the University of Chicago favored permanent income tax cuts as compared to job creation through federal spending. He suggested a permanent tax cut followed by a maximum tax of 25 percent off an individual's income and elimination of double taxation of corporate profits. [4] Friedman claimed that it would help to eliminate the "real tax burden" or government expenditures that the stimulus package would have inflationary effects on the economy and will fail to improve employment. [4]

Congressional Budget Office reports

Congressional Budget Office's economic projection with the rebate removed Congressional Budget Economic Projection without rebate 1977.png
Congressional Budget Office's economic projection with the rebate removed

For the first draft of the bill, the CBO estimated that the impact of President Carter's economic stimulus would contribute an additional $14 billion to the gross national product (GNP) in the first year. In the second year, it would contribute another $18 billion to the country's GNP. When comparing the economy without stimulus in place, the bill would help to add an estimated 1 percent to GNP in its 1977 and 1.3 percent by 1978. The CBO also projected a decrease in unemployment by a decrease in 0.5 percent in 1977 and 0.7 percent in 1978. [20]

When the CBO did a revised forecast to account for the removal of the rebate, the CBO estimated an increase of unemployment rate of 0.2 percent. The increase in unemployment would result in a loss of 280,000 jobs in 1977, while the forecast for unemployment for 1978 remains unchanged. [21]

The CBO also forecast that the government would see a $15.8 billion reduction in tax revenue, with $7.8 billion extending from temporary laws and an additional $7.9 billion that would arise from the stimulus package. [20] Overall, with the added stimulus measures, the Carter administration would see a fiscal budget deficit of $61.8 billion. The actual budget deficit was less than the projected budget of $53 that was announced in 1978. [22]

Developments under the act and estimates of the act's effects

New York Stock Exchange No Known Restrictions- New York Stock Exchange Floor by Thomas J. O'Halloran, 1963 (LOC).jpg
New York Stock Exchange

Carter's advisors initially felt that a two-year economic stimulus program would better help to restore the economy. The original act was priced between $25 billion to $32 billion, claiming that a more comprehensive stimulus plan spread over two years would be more suitable for the economic situation at the time. However, as Carter's aides further examined the situation, a conclusion was made that a one-year program would be more palatable, both economically and in Congress. [23] Schultze presented in front of a congress committee, stating that with the stimulus in place, the country's real GNP would be from 5% to 6% between the fourth quarter of 1976 to 1977. However, without the stimulus, the growth rate would be at a lower 4.5% to 4.75%. [6] He also alluded to the potential of an additional stimulus if growth was not up to projection. [24]

At the State of the Union address in 1981, President Carter announced that the bill had generated 425,000 public service jobs, and the youth employment initiative has helped fund over 200,000 jobs. Additionally, the slots at Job Corps were increased to 44,000 by a total of 100%, and a million summer youth jobs were approved. [25] However, an analysis done by survey firms in 1978 stated that the impact of jobs credits was limited, with many firms were unaware of the existence of such programs. [6] While more than 2.0 million people participated in CETA programs which helped to reduce the unemployment rate, disparities were still present across genders, races and locations. A study revealed that while the unemployment rates among whites declined from 7.8 to 6.4 percent, unemployment among African Americans failed to show any reduction. [8]

A further study done by senior Carter Administration Treasury official Emil Sunley and economist Ned Gramlich stated that the bill had little effect. The bill resulted in heavy inflation that led to the eventual recession in 1980. [26] The period was later known as the time of stagflation, where both inflation and recession occurred at the same time. [3]

The administration's focus on full employment led to the country's eventual problem of inflation. Carter's aides were aware of the inflation problem when they entered office in 1977, but they thought they were able to control it. Carter's aggressive fiscal and monetary policies called for an increase of money supply by the Federal Reserve. This led to a spike in inflation, climbing to 13.3 percent in two years. [27] Even though there was a rise in inflation, unemployment failed to decrease, resulting in a period of high prices and unemployment. It took Paul Volcker, the 12th Federal Reserve chairman, to bring inflation back down with the "Volcker Shock". The strategy implemented, led to the raised interest rates and limiting the country's liquidity to bring down inflation. [28]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reaganomics</span> Economic policies of Ronald Reagan

Reaganomics, or Reaganism, were the neoliberal economic policies promoted by U.S. President Ronald Reagan during the 1980s. These policies are characterized as supply-side economics, trickle-down economics, or "voodoo economics" by opponents, while Reagan and his advocates preferred to call it free-market economics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Humphrey–Hawkins Full Employment Act</span> 1978 United States law requiring the Federal Reserve to perform certain functions

The Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act is an act of legislation by the United States government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National debt of the United States</span>

The national debt of the United States is the total national debt owed by the federal government of the United States to Treasury security holders. The national debt at any point in time is the face value of the then-outstanding Treasury securities that have been issued by the Treasury and other federal agencies. The terms "national deficit" and "national surplus" usually refer to the federal government budget balance from year to year, not the cumulative amount of debt. In a deficit year the national debt increases as the government needs to borrow funds to finance the deficit, while in a surplus year the debt decreases as more money is received than spent, enabling the government to reduce the debt by buying back some Treasury securities. In general, government debt increases as a result of government spending and decreases from tax or other receipts, both of which fluctuate during the course of a fiscal year. There are two components of gross national debt:

The economic policies of Bill Clinton administration, referred to by some as Clintonomics, encapsulates the economic policies of president of the United States Bill Clinton that were implemented during his presidency, which lasted from January 1993 to January 2001.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fiscal policy of the United States</span>

Fiscal policy is any changes the government makes to the national budget to influence a nation's economy. "An essential purpose of this Financial Report is to help American citizens understand the current fiscal policy and the importance and magnitude of policy reforms essential to make it sustainable. A sustainable fiscal policy is explained as the debt held by the public to Gross Domestic Product which is either stable or declining over the long term". The approach to economic policy in the United States was rather laissez-faire until the Great Depression. The government tried to stay away from economic matters as much as possible and hoped that a balanced budget would be maintained. Prior to the Great Depression, the economy did have economic downturns and some were quite severe. However, the economy tended to self-correct so the laissez faire approach to the economy tended to work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States federal budget</span> Budget of the U.S. federal government

The United States budget comprises the spending and revenues of the U.S. federal government. The budget is the financial representation of the priorities of the government, reflecting historical debates and competing economic philosophies. The government primarily spends on healthcare, retirement, and defense programs. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office provides extensive analysis of the budget and its economic effects. CBO estimated in February 2023 that Federal debt held by the public is projected to rise from 98 percent of GDP in 2023 to 118 percent in 2033—an average increase of 2 percentage points per year. Over that period, the growth of interest costs and mandatory spending outpaces the growth of revenues and the economy, driving up debt. Those factors persist beyond 2033, pushing federal debt higher still, to 195 percent of GDP in 2053.

The economic policy and legacy of the George W. Bush administration was characterized by significant income tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, the implementation of Medicare Part D in 2003, increased military spending for two wars, a housing bubble that contributed to the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007–2008, and the Great Recession that followed. Economic performance during the period was adversely affected by two recessions, in 2001 and 2007–2009.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009</span> Stimulus package

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), nicknamed the Recovery Act, was a stimulus package enacted by the 111th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in February 2009. Developed in response to the Great Recession, the primary objective of this federal statute was to save existing jobs and create new ones as soon as possible. Other objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most affected by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stimulus (economics)</span> Attempts to use monetary or fiscal policy to stimulate the economy

In economics, stimulus refers to attempts to use monetary policy or fiscal policy to stimulate the economy. Stimulus can also refer to monetary policies such as lowering interest rates and quantitative easing.

Beginning in 2008 many nations of the world enacted fiscal stimulus plans in response to the Great Recession. These nations used different combinations of government spending and tax cuts to boost their sagging economies. Most of these plans were based on the Keynesian theory that deficit spending by governments can replace some of the demand lost during a recession and prevent the waste of economic resources idled by a lack of demand. The International Monetary Fund recommended that countries implement fiscal stimulus measures equal to 2% of their GDP to help offset the global contraction. In subsequent years, fiscal consolidation measures were implemented by some countries in an effort to reduce debt and deficit levels while at the same time stimulating economic recovery.

The economic policy of the Barack Obama administration, or in its colloquial portmanteau form "Obamanomics", was characterized by moderate tax increases on higher income Americans designed to fund health care reform, reduce the federal budget deficit, and decrease income inequality. President Obama's first term (2009–2013) included measures designed to address the Great Recession and subprime mortgage crisis, which began in 2007. These included a major stimulus package, banking regulation, and comprehensive healthcare reform. As the economy improved and job creation continued during his second term (2013–2017), the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire for the highest income taxpayers and a spending sequester (cap) was implemented, to further reduce the deficit back to typical historical levels. The number of persons without health insurance was reduced by 20 million, reaching a record low level as a percent of the population. By the end of his second term, the number of persons with jobs, real median household income, stock market, and real household net worth were all at record levels, while the unemployment rate was well below historical average.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unemployment in the United States</span> Explanation of unemployment in the United States, presently and historically

Unemployment in the United States discusses the causes and measures of U.S. unemployment and strategies for reducing it. Job creation and unemployment are affected by factors such as economic conditions, global competition, education, automation, and demographics. These factors can affect the number of workers, the duration of unemployment, and wage levels.

Political debates about the United States federal budget discusses some of the more significant U.S. budgetary debates of the 21st century. These include the causes of debt increases, the impact of tax cuts, specific events such as the United States fiscal cliff, the effectiveness of stimulus, and the impact of the Great Recession, among others. The article explains how to analyze the U.S. budget as well as the competing economic schools of thought that support the budgetary positions of the major parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deficit reduction in the United States</span> Economic policy debates and proposals designed to reduce the U.S. federal government budget deficit

Deficit reduction in the United States refers to taxation, spending, and economic policy debates and proposals designed to reduce the federal government budget deficit. Government agencies including the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the U.S. Treasury Department have reported that the federal government is facing a series of important long-run financing challenges, mainly driven by an aging population, rising healthcare costs per person, and rising interest payments on the national debt.

The United States fiscal cliff refers to the combined effect of several previously-enacted laws that came into effect simultaneously in January 2013, increasing taxes and decreasing spending.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012</span> Federal law in the United States changing taxation, "ATRA".

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) was enacted and passed by the United States Congress on January 1, 2013, and was signed into law by US President Barack Obama the next day. ATRA gave permanence to the lower rates of much of the "Bush tax cuts".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic policy of the Donald Trump administration</span>

The economic policy of the Donald Trump administration was characterized by the individual and corporate tax cuts, attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), trade protectionism, immigration restriction, deregulation focused on the energy and financial sectors, and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">CARES Act</span> COVID-19 stimulus in the United States

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act, is a $2.2 trillion economic stimulus bill passed by the 116th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 27, 2020, in response to the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The spending primarily includes $300 billion in one-time cash payments to individual people who submit a tax return in America, $260 billion in increased unemployment benefits, the creation of the Paycheck Protection Program that provides forgivable loans to small businesses with an initial $350 billion in funding, $500 billion in loans for corporations, and $339.8 billion to state and local governments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Rescue Plan Act of 2021</span> Act to address economic effects of COVID-19

The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, also called the COVID-19 Stimulus Package or American Rescue Plan, is a US$1.9 trillion economic stimulus bill passed by the 117th United States Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden on March 11, 2021, to speed up the country's recovery from the economic and health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing recession. First proposed on January 14, 2021, the package builds upon many of the measures in the CARES Act from March 2020 and in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, from December.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic policy of the Joe Biden administration</span>

The economic policy of the Joe Biden administration, dubbed Bidenomics, is characterized by relief measures and vaccination efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic, investments in infrastructure, and strengthening the social safety net, funded by tax increases on higher-income individuals and corporations. Other goals include increasing the national minimum wage and expanding worker training, narrowing income inequality, expanding access to affordable healthcare, and forgiveness of student loan debt. The March 2021 enactment of the American Rescue Plan to provide relief from the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was the first major element of the policy. Biden's Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act was signed into law in November 2021 and contains about $550 billion in additional investment. His Inflation Reduction Act was enacted in August 2022.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Scott, Austin (May 14, 1977). "Carter Signs $20.1 Billion Jobs, Stimulus Measure". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 4, 2020.
  2. ↑ Eizenstat, Stuart (24 April 2018). President Carter : the White House years. Albright, Madeleine Korbel (First ed.). New York, N.Y. ISBN   978-1-250-10455-7. OCLC   1004376369.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  3. 1 2 Taylor, John F. Cogan And John B. (2011-10-03). "Stimulus Has Been a Washington Job Killer". Wall Street Journal. ISSN   0099-9660 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  4. 1 2 3 "Carter Stimulus Plan Criticized by Friedman". The New York Times. 1977-02-28. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  5. 1 2 Kantowicz, Edward R. (1985). "The Limits of Incrementalism: Carter's Efforts at Tax Reform". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 4 (2): 217–233. doi:10.2307/3324625. JSTOR   3324625.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Schulman, Bruce J.; Biven, W. Carl (2004-11-01). "Jimmy Carter's Economy: Policy in an Age of Limits". The Journal of Southern History. 70 (4): 974. doi:10.2307/27648637. ISSN   0022-4642. JSTOR   27648637.
  7. ↑ "Carter's Stimulus Plan Tries to Minimize the Biggest Risks". The New York Times. 1977-01-31. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  8. 1 2 Tobin, James; Thurow, Lester C.; Ortner, Robert; Anderson, Bernard E.; Heebner, A. Gilbert; Ulmer, Melville J.; Lekachman, Robert; Minsky, Hyman P. (1978). "The Carter Economics: A Symposium". Journal of Post Keynesian Economics. 1 (1): 19–45. doi:10.1080/01603477.1978.11489092. ISSN   0160-3477.
  9. ↑ Times, Eileen Shanahan Special to The New York (1976-12-10). "Carter Gets 2 Plans for Tax Reductions and Creation of Jobs". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2020-05-29.
  10. 1 2 3 Mahon, George H. (1977-05-13). "Actions - H.R.4876 - 95th Congress (1977-1978): An Act making economic stimulus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1977, and for other purposes". www.congress.gov. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  11. 1 2 Rowe Jr, James (1977). "Carter Officials Berated For Abandoning Rebate". The Washington Post.
  12. ↑ Witte, John F. (1985). The politics and development of the federal income tax. University of Wisconsin Press. OCLC   473966050.
  13. ↑ "To Agree to the Conference Report On H.R. 4876, Economic ... -- House Vote #171 -- May 4, 1977". GovTrack.us. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  14. 1 2 3 4 Coleman, Eric Clark (2004). Welcome Back, Carter: 2004 Democratic Presidential Poll Winner. 1st Book Library. ISBN   978-1414032009.
  15. 1 2 U.S Department of Labor (January 1977). "ETA Interchange". ETA Interchange. 3.
  16. ↑ "Chapter 8: Carter Administration 1977-1981 | U.S. Department of Labor". www.dol.gov. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  17. ↑ "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey". U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved 5 May 2020.
  18. ↑ Times, Clyde H. Farnsworth Special to The New York (1977-02-04). "Carter Fiscal Plan and $50 Tax Rebates Criticized by Burns". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  19. ↑ "Carter's Fiscal Strategy: Is It Confusing or Flexible?". The New York Times. 1977-01-10. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  20. 1 2 "Overview of the 1978 Budget: An Analysis of President Carter's Revisions" (PDF). Congressional Budget Office. March 1977. Retrieved 7 May 2020.
  21. ↑ "Statement to be Included in the Record by Alice M. Rivlin, Director Congressional Budget Office" (PDF). Congressional Budget Office. 26 April 1977. Retrieved 6 May 2020.
  22. ↑ "The Economic Outlook" (PDF). Congressional Budget Office. February 1978. Retrieved 7 May 2020.
  23. ↑ Times, Eileen Shanahan Special to The New York (1977-01-09). "Carter and Aides Decided Economy Needed More Than Year's Stimulus". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  24. ↑ Rowen, Hobart (1977-01-28). "3 Economic Aides Defend Carter Stimulus Program". Washington Post. ISSN   0190-8286 . Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  25. ↑ "State of the Union Address 1981". www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
  26. ↑ Campagna, Anthony S. (1995). Economic policy in the Carter administration. Greenwood Press. ISBN   0-313-29568-9. OCLC   32665713.
  27. ↑ Eisner, Marc Allen. (2011). The American political economy : institutional evolution of market and state. New York: Routledge. ISBN   978-0-203-88014-2. OCLC   671790272.
  28. ↑ Lim, Kyuteg (2019-12-31). "The Rise of the US Federal Reserve as a World Monetary Authority: Revisiting the Volcker Shock". The Korean Journal of International Studies. 17 (3): 303–335. doi: 10.14731/kjis.2019.12.17.3.303 . ISSN   2233-470X.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.