What a difference two years make
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Charles Reichley
Published: August 13, 2008
Barack Obama has recently been asking voters whether they are better off than they were “four years ago or eight years ago.” But the real question is whether you are better off than you were two years
ago.
By many measures, things are better than eight years ago. But a lot of people are really hurting after the last year and a half — since the Democrats took over the government.
For example, the stock market is higher. In January of 2001, the Dow was at 10,646. Four years later the Dow stood slightly higher, at 10,729. Today, it closed at 11,642. So we are better off than four
or eight years ago. But on January 2007 the Dow was over 12,400, so things have gone downhill the last year and a half of Democratic rule.
My house is worth more than it was four or eight years ago. My 2001 appraisal was $206,000. Four years later, it had risen to $366,000, and it was $368,300 at the start of this year. However, two years
ago my house was appraised at $476,400. My house value increased while the Republicans were in charge and dropped in the past 19 months that Obama’s party controlled Congress.
Or look at the unemployment numbers. Again, things were better before the Democrats won Congress. This decade started with unemployment at 4.2 percent, dropping to 5.7 percent soon after the 9/11
terrorist attacks.
But by 2005 unemployment had dropped back to 5.2 percent. And in January of 2007, when Nancy Pelosi took the gavel of the House of Representatives, unemployment was down to 4.6 percent. Now,
just 19 months later, unemployment has shot back up to 5.7 percent. Under the Democrats’ guidance, unemployment jumped as much as it did after a terror attack.
Obama wants you to choose which political party to support based on whether you were better off now than before Bush took office. But the real comparison isn’t from 2001 to now; or from 2005 to now;
but from 2007 to now. Because for almost any measure you can think of, Americans were better off in January of 2007, when the Democrats took over Congress, than they were in 2001 or 2005.
For another example, household income was up an average of 15 percent between 2001 and 2006. Even the bottom fifth, supposedly “left behind,” had their income increase over 10 percent. Also, the
percent of people who owned homes increased from 67.4 percent in 2000 to 68.9 percent in 2005.
How about a “quality of life” issue — the crime rate? The crime index dropped more than seven percent from 2001 through 2006. Violent crime dropped more than six percent. Even the car theft rates were
down.
So the real question is: are you better off than you were in January of 2007, when Nancy Pelosi took over the House and Harry Reid took over the Senate? From what we’ve seen so far, clearly the answer
is no. But here are some more comparisons.
When the Democrats took over Congress, gas prices were $2.21 a gallon. After 19 months of Pelosi and Reid refusing to allow drilling for oil, the price has soared to $3.86 a gallon — a 75 percent
increase. Oil is up even more — more than double, from $50 to $114. And it was as high as $147 per barrel before the Republicans started pushing for more drilling — a common-sense move the
Democratic leadership is blocking from a vote.
Even basic commodities cost more. Corn prices have nearly tripled, driving up the cost not only of bread but also poultry, meat and other food items dependent on corn or on oil.
Housing prices have plummeted. Unemployment is up. The stock market is down. Prices are up. Confidence is down.
About the only bright spot in the past two years is the resounding success of the McCain-backed surge in Iraq. Of course, that winning strategy was opposed vehemently by the Democrats and Obama.
The past two Democrat years have been so bad that, as Obama points out, the reign of the Democrats has managed to wipe out the previous six years of gains under Republican leadership.
So when Obama asks if you are better off today, if the answer is no, remember who has been in charge while everything went south. Two years ago America voted for change. And we got it — change for
the worse. Let’s fix that mistake this year.
Charles Reichley has been a Prince William County resident since 1981. He can be reached at critically
.
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.

Reader Reactions
Posted by ( RonCharest ) on August 16, 2008 at 1:54 pm
As an additional bit of facts to show just how “Fact-Free” Mr. Reichley’s column is, we bring you this article for that bastion of liberalism, The New York Times, article “Dr. Doom,“ published yesterday Aug 15:
“On Sept. 7, 2006, Nouriel Roubini, an economics professor at New York University, stood before an audience of economists at the International Monetary Fund and announced that a crisis was brewing. In the coming months and years, he warned, the United States was likely to face a once-in-a-lifetime housing bust, an oil shock, sharply declining consumer confidence and, ultimately, a deep recession. He laid out a bleak sequence of events: homeowners defaulting on mortgages, trillions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities unraveling worldwide and the global financial system shuddering to a halt. These developments, he went on, could cripple or destroy hedge funds, investment banks and other major financial institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The audience seemed skeptical, even dismissive. [...]“
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/magazine/17pessimist-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
But, in Mr. Reichley’s world, everything bad that has happened since Nov 2006 is the fault of the Democratic-controlled congress.
Right.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rafaelva ) on August 15, 2008 at 12:32 pm
My first inclination is to call Mr Reichley an agent provocateur, however, I seem to recall agent provocateurs were used to incite crowds to overthrow the King of France.
Then I found “Cogent Provocateur” this individual stirs the crowd by drawing on the crowd’s common sense, by blaming the ruling parties failures and faults on the political party not in power, or touts failures as successes, when everyone knows better.
I found the following definition:
“COGENT PROVOCATEUR:
free agent, loose cannon, pointy stick ... taking an imposing analytic toolkit out of the box, over the wall and into the street ... with callous disregard for accepted wisdom and standard English”
He must be a cogent provacateur, a closet liberal, spurring people to argue with him, and realize the exact opposite of his point.
COGENT PROVOCATEUR:
free agent, loose cannon, pointy stick ... taking an imposing analytic toolkit out of the box, over the wall and into the street ... with callous disregard for accepted wisdom and standard English
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( phdee ) on August 14, 2008 at 11:34 am
Let’s use the same logic/reasoning of this Republican idiot and address local issues.
We have a majority of Republ,ican trash on the PWC BOCS. And PWC and Manassas lead N. Va. in housing foreclosures. It must have been because of the Republican majority and yheor racist/eythnic cleansing resolution. And the wild anti-immigrant crowd claims crime has decreased even though the police stats say it has for 5 years - before Stewart et al. Businesses have gone out of busoness under the Repubs. Housing values have really declined under Stewazrt, Stirrup, May, Nohne, e al. Tax revenue hasa decreaszed. Social service have been reduced or eliminated. Sumbag Stewart hsas never been able to cit4e anything other than antecdotes for the resolution’s basis. Why, if you believe him and the anti crowed, illegals over age 65, disabled, poor, have crossed the Mexican bordcer, travelled all the way to PWC to buy and $500,000 house so they can qualify for reduced real estate taxes, based on low income. All under BOCS Republicans. And the jail is short of money. And the DRS program undr McQuigg needs a big chunk of money due to lack of funds from housing transactions - all under Repub BICS. Why would anyone vote for this Republican BOCSX slime and scum? Beats me. Perhaps they appeal to Reichley - ignorant as hye is.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on August 14, 2008 at 10:01 am
How can a man write this stuff with a clear conscience? Reichley is clearly too smart to actually believe half of what he’s written. This is nothing more than lies, smears and half truths designed to confuse the public.
Sadly, my children will pay for the lies and propaganda spread by the likes of Charles Reichley. Shame on you.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( RonCharest ) on August 14, 2008 at 4:50 am
President Bush is still president, and the many hanger-ons and wanna-bes he appointed to key administration posts are still there. The Democrats do not, by themselves, have the ability to end a Republican-led filibuster in the Senate. The Democrats, by themselves, do not have the ability to override a Presidential veto.
I find it amazing that for the first two years of the Bush administration, everything bad that happened was blamed on the outgoing Clinton Administration, on the ground that “things took time to be noticed.“
Now, Conservatives blames the Democrats for everything bad on the basis that they should have stepped in and instantly, magically, fixed six years of inept Republican management.
Mr. Reichley, you are ridiculous.
Report Inappropriate Comment