Our Selective Ideological Memories

I’m sure most people recognize this scenario:

New president, following an increasingly unpopular regime, is elected in a major electoral referendum as the populous wants a directional change for the country. Quickly, the new administration moves to reverse the course of the past several years and completely change the federal government’s focus. A massive stimulus package is passed within the first 100 days. The government steps in to dismantle and remake a sector of the transportation industry, to the hue and cry of a segment of the population, and it brings claims of government overreach. The President goes on the offensive to reclaim America’s prestige in the world and undoing the damage done by the previous administration, revamping relationships with both allies and enemies, and reclaiming the mantle of world leadership. The President has strong weapons: he is charismatic, a world-class orator with an easy smile and a disarming personality. Even his detractors can’t help but find him likeable, though they strongly disagree with his policies.

But…after a year and alarmingly mounting debts, the popular tide begins to turn. Congress, formerly seeming to be just a pawn doing the administration’s bidding, now has its eye on the midterm elections, and with the mood of the country casting doubt begins to buck the administration. Reforms that the President deems vital to finishing the job that he started are thwarted by Congress, usually with the excuse that the country’s deficits are already too big, and both the House and Senate routinely block further changes to any existing programs. Unemployment runs over 10% for 9 months, and that’s only among those who haven’t given up looking for work. Predictably, the midterm elections are a bloodbath for the President’s party, rolling back all of the gains made on his coattails in his election year.

Surprisingly to some, this scenario isn’t a hypothetical about Obama, but is a recounting of Reagan’s first two years in office.

If you’re like most Americans, and especially most Republicans, the details of the days from January 1981 to December 1982 are largely forgotten; only the ultimate result of the Reagan years are in most people’s memory banks.

What Reagan did isn’t really that different from what Obama is doing. Reagan’s version of the Recovery Act was to cut the crushing income taxes the country was under across the board (the top tax rate was initially cut from 70% to 50%, while the middle class also received huge tax relief), but the net result was the same: money went to the economic stimulus at the expense of the federal government’s coffers, meaning that the government had a huge budget shortfall. Reagan fired the PATCO workers in what was deemed an unprecedented federal intervention and abuse of power (and arguably putting the air transportation industry’s safety in jeopardy for a time period). Even with the decreased federal coffers, Reagan felt it essential to ratchet up the country’s spending on defense in an attempt to outspend the Soviet Union and ultimately end the Cold War, but at a price that was astronomical (and with no guarantee of success at the time).

The point is this: remember what actually transpired during the Reagan years, and if you don’t remember, do a little research. This isn’t just about the ideological debate of larger government vs. smaller government, but about economic reality and what is best for the needs of the country. What ailed the country in 1980 was overregulation of business and high federal taxes. That can hardly be argued to be the case now, yet we’re in just as severe of an economic crisis. What Obama proposes is essentially the same formula: deliver a huge injection of money into the economy, which drives up the nation’s debt; make a sweeping investment in parts of the economy seen as necessary for long-term survival, which drives the deficit up further still, all in the expectation that the changes will be cheaper in the long run than doing nothing and will ultimately bring new economic growth.

I’m not going to take up space belaboring the obvious differences; I find the similarities more striking. It’s simply ironic that many of the same people who loved Reagan’s solution decry Obama’s now, even though the consequences of Reagan’s policies are exactly what they claim to fear today. The only difference is a belief that what methodology worked then is the same methodology that should be applied now, even though the details and problems have changed.

A little ideological agnosticism and a bit more pragmatism might do a large part of the country a great deal of good.