Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Correcting the Revisionists on the Reagan Record
Townhall.com ^ | January 6, 2015 | David Limbaugh

Posted on 01/06/2015 4:48:11 AM PST by Kaslin

My daughter asked me my opinion on an article she read in Vanity Fair attempting to debunk the presidential record of Ronald Reagan. I happily responded.

The writer of the piece is veteran liberal commentator Michael Kinsley, who used to be a regular on William F. Buckley Jr.'s "Firing Line" and CNN's "Crossfire." It's not as though he appeared out of nowhere, studied the evidence anew and shared a novel theory. He's been dissing Reaganomics for decades along with other Democrats and liberals, whose only recourse is to distort the Gipper's phenomenal record.

Why is this even relevant, you ask? Well, according to Kinsley, "every serious G.O.P. presidential aspirant invokes the glorious era of Ronald Reagan, to which the country must return. Ignore the fact that, for the likes of Paul Ryan and Rand Paul, Reagan's actual record -- from increased bureaucracy to higher deficits -- should be seen as a complete failure."

Ever since Reagan's two terms in office, Democrats have been trying to recast those years of remarkable peacetime growth without inflation as a time of abject greed, when the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. But the facts have never corroborated their propaganda.

To really understand Reagan's record -- and thus mainstream conservatism still today -- you must remember just how bleak things were during the Carter years. At the end of Jimmy Carter's term, unemployment was 7.4 percent and galloping toward double figures; inflation was already in double digits; and interest rates were a staggering 21.5 percent. There was no end in sight.

Indeed, I remember the general malaise that gripped the nation at that time -- the attitude of despair, fatalism and resignation. America's best years, according to Carter's apologists, were behind her, and it wasn't his fault that things were so abysmally bleak.

Reagan, against all naysayers, promised that the proper policies could unleash the sleeping economic giant again and that we could return to sustained, robust growth and prosperity. Once elected, despite strong opposition from Democrats in Congress, he fulfilled his promise.

Reagan inherited a steep recession but, unlike President Obama today, did not keep using it as an excuse well into his presidency. Reagan didn't need excuses, because his policies began to produce results very quickly.

Reagan had pushed for a 30 percent across-the-board cut in marginal income tax rates, but Democrats in Congress forced a reduction to 25 percent and delayed its implementation. But once the bill passed and kicked in, the results were dramatic.

Along with Reagan's policy of deregulation, his tax cuts produced an economic boom that continued for almost eight full years -- from November 1982 to July 1990 -- with not a scintilla of a recession.

Reagan's policies led to the largest period of economic growth to date in the history of the nation. The economy was nearly a third larger at the conclusion of the Reagan years than at the beginning, and real median family income grew by $4,000, as opposed to almost no growth during the Ford-Carter years.

Like President John F. Kennedy, Reagan demonstrated that reducing marginal income tax rates could increase revenues. Revenues almost doubled during the Reagan years, and even after adjusting for inflation, they increased by some 28 percent. Reaganomics also shattered the long-established economic textbook axiom that there is a trade-off between unemployment and inflation. Despite nearly 20 million new jobs, there was barely any upward pressure on prices.

Though Democrats preached that under Reagan, the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, in fact the plight of all income groups improved. Not only that but upward mobility, which received its last rites under Carter, made a dramatic comeback, as a Treasury Department study revealed that 86 percent of the people in the lowest 20 percent of income in 1979 graduated into higher categories during the '80s. More people in every income group moved up than down except -- ironically -- the top one percent of earners.

Moreover, the real Reagan record puts the lie to the liberal manta that the rich didn't pay their "fair share." In the first place, average effective income tax rates were cut more for lower-income groups than for higher-income groups. In 1991, after the Reagan cuts had been in place for almost a decade, the top 1 percent of income earners paid 25 percent of income taxes; the top 5 percent paid 43 percent; and the bottom half paid only 5 percent. How is that for fairness?

Unfortunately, Reagan didn't achieve the spending reductions he'd envisioned, though some misinformation exists here, too. Military spending constituted much of the increase -- by design and by necessity after Carter's gutting of our vital defenses. But the rate of domestic spending grew more slowly under Reagan than under his immediate predecessors and would have been reduced far more but for recalcitrant big-spending Democratic congressmen.

The military spending, coupled with Reagan's coherent peace-through-strength foreign policy, yielded immeasurable dividends, as the Soviet Union soon disintegrated. And no, my revisionist liberal friends, this was not because of a willing, enlightened Mikhail Gorbachev.

President Reagan is still the model for conservative presidential aspirants -- and for very good reasons that will not be erased, no matter how earnestly liberals try.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: 1980election; 1984election; 2014election; 2016election; demagogicparty; dnctalkingpoints; election1980; election1984; election2014; election2016; johnfkennedy; memebuilding; michaelkinsley; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; reaganlegacy; revisionisthistory; ronaldreagan; vanityfair

1 posted on 01/06/2015 4:48:11 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Michael Kinsley; the original “pencil-necked geek”.


2 posted on 01/06/2015 5:03:48 AM PST by Tucker39 (Welcome to America! Now speak English; and keep to the right....In driving, in Faith, and politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The thing that purely terrifies the liars about RR is not his record. Rather it is that he so easily displaced the doom and gloom that they had successfully implanted into the minds of many Americans. He LED this nation.


3 posted on 01/06/2015 5:08:12 AM PST by TalBlack (Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Reagan years were heady and hopeful. Businesses were starting up, ideas were brewing, people were spending money like crazy on ..things their hearts desired. But, as ever, there was the looming fear of the ever-growing socialist government that blocked out the sun, like Tip O’Neil’s shadow.


4 posted on 01/06/2015 5:10:13 AM PST by ArtDodger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack
and he did it with common sense, plain, one syllable talk ... just talkin' to people about what he thought was wrong and what he thought was right and what he thought we should DO about it.

His jokes and stories were so down home, the libs had to attend therapy in order to re-claim their madness after an hour of being with President Reagan.

5 posted on 01/06/2015 5:23:15 AM PST by knarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Reagan's policies led to the largest period of economic growth to date in the history of the nation. The economy was nearly a third larger at the conclusion of the Reagan years than at the beginning, and real median family income grew by $4,000, as opposed to almost no growth during the Ford-Carter years.

Let Michael Kinsley debate these federal government facts.

I think these federal government numbers support those two facts and the other facts in the article about the Reagan Administration.

GDP data ref: BEA glossary
GDP 1929 - 2014 Current-Dollar and "Real" Gross Domestic Product (Seasonally adjusted annual rates)

Annual
GDP in
billions
of
current
dollars
GDP in
billions
of
chained
2009
dollars
1980 2,862.5 6,450.4
1981 3,211.0 6,617.7
1982 3,345.0 6,491.3
1983 3,638.1 6,792.0
1984 4,040.7 7,285.0
1985 4,346.7 7,593.8
1986 4,590.2 7,860.5
1987 4,870.2 8,132.6
1988 5,252.6 8,474.5
1989 5,657.7 8,786.4
1990 5,979.6 8,955.0
1991 6,174.0 8,948.4
1992 6,539.3 9,266.6
1993 6,878.7 9,521.0
1994 7,308.8 9,905.4
1995 7,664.1 10,174.8
1996 8,100.2 10,561.0
1997 8,608.5 11,034.9
1998 9,089.2 11,525.9
1999 9,660.6 12,065.9
2000 10,284.8 12,559.7
2001 10,621.8 12,682.2
2002 10,977.5 12,908.8
2003 11,510.7 13,271.1
2004 12,274.9 13,773.5
2005 13,093.7 14,234.2
2006 13,855.9 14,613.8
2007 14,477.6 14,873.7
2008 14,718.6 14,830.4
2009 14,418.7 14,418.7
2010 14,964.4 14,783.8
2011 15,517.9 15,020.6
2012 16,163.2 15,369.2
2013 16,768.1 15,710.3

Labor Force Statistics from the Census Bureau Current Population Survey (CPS) and other federal sources.

See below for table information.

Column headings

  1. Population
  2. Civilian noninstitutional population [thousands]
  3. Civilian labor force [thousands]
  4. Civilian labor force participation rate
  5. Employed [thousands]
  6. Employment-population ratio
  7. Employed full time (persons who usually work 35 hours or more) [thousands]
  8. Employed part time (persons who usually work less than 35 hours
  9. Unemployed [thousands]
  10. Unemployed looking for full-time work [thousands]
  11. Unemployment rate
  12. Unemployment rate of the full-time labor force
  13. Not in labor force [thousands]

N = not available.Some columns are omitted to fit desired columns on a PC screen. The additional columns are explained below.

Year 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 13.
1948 60840 58.8 56.6 N N N
1949 62032 59.4 55.3 N N N
1950 62260 59.2 56.8 N N N
1951 62225 59.4 57.4 N N N
1952 62362 59.0 57.3 N N N
1953 62870 58.5 56.3 N N N
1954 63668 58.5 55.4 N N N
1955 66100 60.0 57.5 N N N
1956 66635 59.8 57.3 N N N
1957 67197 59.5 56.6 N N N
1958 67814 59.3 55.6 N N N
1959 68783 59.3 56.0 N N N
1960 70239 59.6 55.9 N N N
1961 70314 59.0 55.3 N N N
1962 70881 58.6 55.3 N N N
1963 72298 58.7 55.4 N N N
1964 73353 58.5 55.6 N N N
1965 74908 58.9 56.5 N N N
1966 76483 59.5 57.3 N N N
1967 78292 59.9 57.5 N N N
1968 79195 59.6 57.6 65503 10906 N
1969 81506 60.3 58.1 66929 11645 N
1970 83498 60.4 56.9 66654 11977 N
1971 85318 60.3 56.7 67622 12588 N
1972 87675 60.4 57.2 70115 12922 N
1973 90579 61.1 58.2 72560 13730 N
1974 92688 61.3 57.2 72825 13815 N
1975 94309 61.1 56.0 72269 14218 60028
1976 97102 61.8 57.0 74532 15037 60120
1977 100294 62.6 58.5 77922 15763 59846
1978 103484 63.5 59.7 81416 16046 59541
1979 105923 63.8 60.0 83345 16389 60131
1980 107442 63.7 59.0 82648 16843 61252
1981 109057 63.8 58.5 82799 17262 61933
1982 110959 64.1 57.3 80606 18409 62087
1983 112160 64.1 58.6 83997 18556 62790
1984 114257 64.5 59.8 87458 18487 62876
1985 116211 64.9 60.4 89259 18778 62730
1986 118587 65.4 60.9 91297 19194 62778
1987 120593 65.7 61.9 93914 19660 62874
1988 122488 66.1 62.6 95927 20053 62765
1989 124448 66.5 63.0 98015 19823 62570
1990 126069 66.4 62.3 98285 20123 63797
1991 126669 66.1 61.4 96973 20692 64982
1992 128340 66.3 61.4 97949 20891 65276
1993 129742 66.3 61.9 99952 21282 65879
1994 131862 66.7 63.0 101003 23465 65739
1995 132614 66.5 62.8 102217 23064 66738
1996 135014 67.0 63.5 104753 23152 66444
1997 136916 67.1 64.0 107293 23293 67019
1998 138431 67.2 64.2 109129 23264 67666
1999 139991 67.1 64.4 111415 23010 68669
2000 142944 66.9 64.3 114163 23340 70616
2001 144210 66.7 63.0 112610 23694 71901
2002 145140 66.4 62.5 112942 23755 73403
2003 146815 66.1 62.2 113947 24346 75461
2004 148005 66.0 62.4 115204 24846 76413
2005 150032 66.0 62.8 117753 24888 77164
2006 152393 66.3 63.3 120658 24989 77503
2007 153645 66.0 62.8 121621 24727 79291
2008 154723 65.9 61.4 118281 25836 80102
2009 153591 64.9 58.4 110906 27423 83148
2010 153799 64.4 58.3 111653 27443 84913
2011 153980 64.0 58.5 113268 27346 86452
2012 155424 63.7 58.7 115616 27664 88745
2013 154949 62.8 58.5 116845 27348 91616
2014 155948(III) 62.8(III) 59.0(III) 118797(III) 27724(III) 92285(III)
pop.
146630
149190
152270
154880
157550
160180
163030
165930
168900
171980
174880
177830
180670
183690
186540
189240
191890
194300
196560
198710
200710
202680
205050
207660
209900
211910
213850
215970
218040
220240
222580
225060
227220
229470
231660
233790
235820
237920
240130
242290
244500
246820
249620
252980
256510
259920
263130
266280
269390
272650
275850
279040
282160
284970
287630
290110
292810
295520
298380
301230
304090
306770
309330
311590
313910
316160
319470
one* two** three***
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N N
N N 43,558
N N 45,435
N N 47,124
N N 46,759
N N 46,304
N N 48,287
N N 49,262
N N 47,702
N N 46,453
N N 47,224
N N 47,523
N N 49,362
N N 49,225
N N 47,668
N N 46,877
N N 46,751
N N 46,425
N N 47,866
N N 48,761
N N 50,488
N N 51,121
N N 51,514
N N 52,432
N N 51,735
N N 50,249
N N 49,836
N N 49,594
N N 50,148
N N 51,719
N N 52,471
N N 53,551
N N 55,497
N N 56,895
N N 56,800
N N 55,562
N N 54,913
N N 54,865
N N 54,674
N N 55,278
N N 55,689
123524 22810 56,436
121211 22138 54,423
116663 21290 54,059
117006 22153 52,646
118033 22647 51,842
119844 23216 51,759
120636 23787 51,939
122558 25108 N
labor labor median
force force income
domestic foreign
born born
[1000s] [1000s]
Recession (qtr)
November 1948(IV) to
October 1949(IV)
-
-
-
July 1953(II) to
May 1954(II)
-
-
August 1957(III) to
April 1958(II)
-
April 1960(II) to
February 1961(I)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
December 1969(IV) to
November 1970(IV)
-
-
November 1973(IV)
to
March 1975(I)
-
-
-
-
January(I) to July 1980(III)
July 1981(III) to
November 1982(IV)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
July 1990(III) to
March 1991(I)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
March(I) to November 2001 (IV)
-
-
-
-
-
December 2007 (IV)
to
June 2009 (II)
-
-
-
-
-

*,**One & Two: Source: to find the tables go here Data Retrieval: Labor Force Statistics (CPS)

HOUSEHOLD DATA Table A-7. Employment status of the civilian population by nativity and sex, not seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands]
Employment status and nativity. Then

Scroll down to "Retrieve Data"

The data that I include above are from the month of December except for 2014 where November is the last month with data available.

***Three: For the Census Bureau income data go here. Choose "Consumer Income Reports (P60)" then choose "P60-249 Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013" (pdf file).

Table Information
I've combined several tables into one. Most of the tables were obtained here: go to Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Labor Force Statisics from the Current Population Survey (CPS). Make your selections. I chose quarterly data.

I took the fourth quarter data from each table and combined them into the main part of the table above. For the year 2014 I took the third quarter data and marked the data with (III).

pop. Population data
Go hereU.S. population and US Census clock, Dec 22, 2014 319.47 million

Employment-population ratio
Employment-population ratio defined in BLS art4full.pdf file.

Civilian labor force participation rate
Civilian labor force participation rate defined in BLS art4full.pdf file.

Unemployment rate
Unemployment rate of the full-time labor force defined in BLS art4full.pdf file.

Recession
CENSUS BUREAU, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SOURCES
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. Cambridge MA 02138 US Business Cycle Expansions and ContractionsLink from BLS SPOTLIGHT ON STATISTICS THE RECESSION OF 2007 – 2009

The NBER does not define a recession in terms of two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP.
Rather, a recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales.


Footnotes

N Not available.

Z Represents or rounds to zero.

6 posted on 01/06/2015 5:25:10 AM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Michael Kinsley, moron.

I remember those times well, everything Limbaugh says is true. Reagan was one of a handful of exceptional presidents, he genuinely brought the US back from the brink, and started an economic boom, stable peace, and a cultural renewal of close to 25 years.

7 posted on 01/06/2015 5:34:47 AM PST by Lakeshark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I liked how RR would not let the obstacles like Democrats, naysayers and the media get in his way. He would just move ahead with what he knew would work and would always be upbeat and it did work. He would talk to the American people and we would support him. The thing about today’s Republicans is they want power and to spend money in the way they want and do not trust the American with our own money. Sounds like Democrats and not Republicans. Republicans need to know that you are hated by the left and no matter what you do and how you act that will always be the case. Just do what is right and the rest will take care of itself.


8 posted on 01/06/2015 6:04:47 AM PST by freeonefrom (God bless America and our troops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I will, grudgingly, give the Carter Administration credit for two things:

1. A modest turnaround in defense spending as a share of GDP, after ten years of decline in the Nixon-Ford years:

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

2. Deregulation of the transportation (airline, trucking, and rail) industry:

http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/09/3-cheers-for-jimmy-carter-the


9 posted on 01/06/2015 6:07:04 AM PST by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeonefrom
He would just move ahead with what he knew would work and would always be upbeat and it did work.

We could use a real dose of justified optimism in the country today.

10 posted on 01/06/2015 6:45:26 AM PST by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Forget the “blame Bush” crowd, plenty of worthless pieces of pond scam are still blaming Reagan.


11 posted on 01/06/2015 9:42:19 PM PST by Impy (They pull a knife, you pull a gun. That's the CHICAGO WAY, and that's how you beat the rats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson