Let Zombie Reagan Die Already
- Details
- Published on Tuesday, 08 February 2011 21:04
- Written by Chase McGee
Sometimes I think many Republicans use "God" and "Ronald Reagan" interchangeably. In some cases, I wonder if they know the difference. The reverence, bordering on fanatical, lavished upon the late president is worthy of great awe, regardless of your political affiliation. Having been deified for vigilantly adhering to the ideals of pure conservatism by promoting limited government and a family-values agenda, Reagan became the face of fiscal austerity and moral fortitude.
He is, by the Republican metric, a saint. Here, in the real world, however, history records Reagan as a benefactor of precipitous timing and being in the enviable position of not having failed as miserably as his two Republican successors.
Perhaps the most coveted characteristic for a candidate today seeking the office of President is that of fiscal conservatism. Many Conservatives believe cutting taxes until you can almost hear the clinking of wine glasses in celebration and dismantling government programs like a glass piñata are the true solutions to America's financial solvency. And Reagan cut taxes. In fact, in 1981, Reagan produced one of the largest tax cuts in American history by nearly cutting 2% of the GDP, or $38 billion ($90 billion in today's dollars.) That's where many disciples of Reagan catch a bit of his admittedly unfortunate Alzheimer's. After 1981, Reagan raised taxes not once, not twice, not three times… exhausting isn't it? By the end of Reagan's term, he had raised taxes in one way, shape, or form five times. Be it a payroll tax or a tax on gasoline, money came from both the corporation and the individual into the government's coffers under names such as the Deficit Reduction Act or the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Even in 1986 when Reagan lowered taxes again, he did so while removing a substantial proportion of the deductions that had driven the prosperity wrought from the 1981 tax cut.
Reaganomics has been argued to be an enormous success by one Nobel Prize winning economist, and a colossal failure by another. As history has shown us, when there is no clear victor, compelling arguments laying claim to the prize will be supplied immediately by both sides. We may never know the true cause of the marked prosperity the Nineties brought, but what we do know is what transpired during Reagan's own term. Even with the eventual job growth, the percentage of families living under the poverty line stayed consistent through his entire service as president. Those without health insurance grew to 37 million and for the first time since 1914, America became a debtor nation with a 6% increase in national debt since Reagan first took office. To say there weren't some successes, many of which benefited corporations and the wealthy, certainly a flagship ideal of the GOP, would be dishonest. Still, one might find a prodigious contradiction regarding today's deficit-hawks and their worship of a president who presided during years of obscene deficit spending.
Reagan's moral compass was a bit off kilter, as well. Many are familiar with the Iran-Contra scandal; Reagan's involvement may never be known beyond a doubt, but he either knowingly contributed to the armament of a regime with questionable intentions or was not an effective governor of his own administration, being unaware of significant events transpiring under his command. As well, equating the moral standing of the progenitors of the Taliban to the founding fathers of America demonstrates a clear lack of acute insight so often attributed to the "Great Communicator."
This article is not aiming to dismiss Reagan as a complete failure, but to tear down the lionization of a mere mortal. Reagan was a president whose ideology was exceptional only in that it was innovative. The experiment did not empirically demonstrate that his principles-in-execution promoted a general welfare, in fact, if we are to believe the suggestion that it takes three years for a tax fluctuation to demonstrate any effect, it was his tax increases that spurred the economic growth of the late 80's. The GOP needs to stop promoting this presidential chimera as a beacon of certain economic prosperity and American uprightness. Reagan was a gregarious politician with an aggressive agenda, but it is the same modus operandi that Republicans use to fault President Obama, and he's only had two and a half years to forge a recovery, a recovery that shows definitive signs of life. Is Obama working to be the Reagan that Reagan could never be? I certainly hope so.
