[BroJoeK]

rockrr: "Good image and a good find. Sure looks like a post-Civil War “Fedzilla” to me ;’)"

Of course, meaning: NOT!

My argument for the "Progressive" Woodrow Wilson is based on the following:

1. 15th and 16th Amendments go into effect, along with Federal Reserve under Wilson, freeing Washington from state controls and providing unlimited funds for whatever political imaginations can come up with.

2. Your chart doesn't show it, but Federal spending rose from 2.1% in 1916 to 3.9% in 1917, to 17% and 24% in following years.
   I am suggesting that increase in 1917 was less about the war, and more about domestic politics.
   Indeed, if I'm wrong about this, then Wilson doesn't really have much of substance with which to claim the title "Progressive".

Indeed, what do we call a "progressive" who can't spend a lot of money? Answer: conservative.

[Sherman Logan]

Let’s see, Wilson was elected in 1912/

Federal spending in 1860 was 1.4% of GDP. By 1916 it had ridden all the way to 2.1%. Then spike drastically in the next couple of years.

You might want to check into history of what else was going on in those years