No one should doubt the political prowess of Barack Obama, a first-term U.S. senator who catapulted onto the national stage, upsetting the plans of political stalwarts like Hillary Clinton, John McCain and others.
It is too early to determine whether he will be termed a greater communicator, a tag that was placed on Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton during their presidential tenures. Earning that designation is about more than using pleasant-sounding words; it is moving the country, and therefore the Washington politicians, to action with little regard for partisanship.
President Obama is facing an early test somewhat of his making but also part of what he inherited from the Bush administration. The economic doldrums here and abroad set clear markers for turning electoral votes into political muscle.
For all of the political pundits watching and commenting on the maneuvering of the new president and his team on the economic front, there has been little if any context from past economic tussles between the White House and Congress.
President Reagan rode a wave of change into the White House, parlaying the malaise message of President Carter into a GOP takeover of the presidency and the Senate. Double-digit inflation and unemployment combined with American hostages in Iran were too much for the Carter administration to overcome.
The Reagan team went to work on supply-side economics with an emphasis on how quickly the economy would improve in contrast to the previous four years. Tax cuts were passed and spending reductions, except for defense, quickly moved through the Congress. Democrats, disgruntled with the Carter years and sensing a political shift to the right, formed coalitions to partner with the Reagan coalition in Congress.
There was little tempering of public expectations of the economic rebound resulting from the Reagan legislative approach. But the recession-mired economy remained stagnant, deficits soared and the Republican majority in the Senate fractured. Inflation dropped but unemployment remained in the double-digit range.
A year later, in 1982, after riding a crest of tax cuts and spending reductions, Mr. Reagan and his Republican soldiers in the Congress sounded a retreat. The first off-year elections erased the GOP gains in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Congress returned following the 1982 elections in a lame-duck session that prompted senators to sport in their lapels the back half of a duck. A public works-inspired program was debated during the session, and an increase in the gasoline tax was the mechanism to prime the revenue pump. A majority of Republicans and Democrats in Congress decided the time was right to put Americans back to work, and the government offered the most convenient vehicle to achieve the objective.
In the closing days of the lame-duck Congress, House Speaker
Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill of Massachusetts pledged never to hold another post-election session. He made good on his promise.
There are lessons for the Obama administration from the 1981 and 1982 Reagan experiences.
Managing expectations and predicting the economic future are foremost in setting the political and consumer mindset.
To date the Obama team and particularly the president have held down thoughts of an immediate turnaround in the economic fortunes of most Americans. Staying on that course is a sound lesson learned from a failed approach 28 years earlier.
To reach Tom Griscom, call (423) 757-6472 or e-mail tgriscom@timesfreepress.com.
