It may be hard to believe, but President Franklin D. Roosevelt once offered a blueprint for property tax reform that remains relevant to state policymakers trying to address property tax reform. Interestingly, this blueprint didn’t come from his progressive New Deal agenda, but rather from a campaign speech he delivered 93 years ago during the 1932 presidential campaign.
At the time, then–New York Gov. Roosevelt was not only criticizing President Herbert Hoover for the Great Depression, but also for what he perceived to be the fiscal recklessness of the Hoover administration. He condemned Hoover’s excessive spending and mounting deficits – issues that were primarily the result of the economic downturn.
On September 29, 1932, speaking in Sioux City, Iowa, Roosevelt addressed agricultural policy and tariffs, but also made striking remarks about the size and inefficiency of government. Regarding the federal government, Roosevelt warned that it had grown too large and wasteful:
“Later in this campaign I propose to analyze the enormous increase in the growth of what you and I call bureaucracy. We are not getting an adequate return for the money we are spending in Washington, or to put it another way, we are spending altogether too much money for Government services that are neither practical nor necessary. And then, in addition to that, we are attempting too many functions. We need to simplify what the Federal Government is giving to the people.”
He also accused Hoover of leading “the greatest spending Administration in peace times in all our history,” charging that it had “piled bureau on bureau, commission on commission,” and failed to anticipate the declining earning power of ordinary Americans. “Bureaus and bureaucrats, commissions and commissioners have been retained at the expense of the taxpayer,” Roosevelt lamented.
But Roosevelt’s critique wasn’t limited to the federal government, he extended his call for reform to local governments as well. Speaking to Iowans, he emphasized the importance of examining how public funds are distributed across various levels of government:
“Half of what you and I pay for the support of Government — in other words, on the average in this country fifty cents out of every dollar — goes to local government, that is, cities, townships, counties and lots of other small units; and the other half, the other fifty cents, goes to the State and Nation. This fifty cents that goes to local government, therefore, points to the necessity for attention to local government.”
Although he was running for federal office, Roosevelt urged local governments to adopt fiscally conservative principles:
“As a broad proposition you and I know we are not using our present agencies of local government with real economy and efficiency. That means we must require our public servants to give a fuller measure of service for what they are paid. It means we must eliminate useless office holders. It means every public official; every employee of local government must determine that he owes it to the country to cooperate in the great purpose of saving the taxpayers’ money.”
He also warned that “we have too many tax layers,” arguing that true relief could come only through “resolute, courageous cutting.” Even though he acknowledged he had no direct authority over local governments, Roosevelt said he felt a moral obligation to address the issue of government efficiency and taxpayer responsibility:
“And I propose to use this position of high responsibility to discuss up and down the country, in all seasons and at all times, the duty of reducing taxes, of increasing the efficiency of Government, of cutting out the underbrush around our governmental structure, of getting the most public service for every dollar paid in taxation. That I pledge you, and nothing I have said in the campaign transcends in importance this covenant with the taxpayers of the United States.”
Roosevelt’s message in Sioux City was one of fiscal conservatism—calling for spending restraint, streamlined government, and more efficient public service.
Coolidge regarded “a good budget as among the most noblest monuments of virtue.” “Economy in the cost of government is inseparable from reduction in taxes. We cannot have the latter without the former.” stated Coolidge.
Those same principles are urgently needed today as Iowa grapples with the challenge of rising property taxes.
State policymakers across the nation are trying to figure out a policy solution to rising property taxes. Government spending drives taxation and if tax relief is the objective, then policymakers must work to limit spending through conservative budgeting and reforming government.
Unfortunately, Roosevelt’s rhetoric in Sioux City did not match his policies under the New Deal. Nevertheless, 93 years ago in Sioux City, FDR, whether intentional or not, provided the framework to address property tax reform through limiting spending and reducing government.
