Last updated 20/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 January 2009
The former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tip O'Neill, has observed “I hate to say it about such an agreeable man, but it was sinful that Ronald Reagan ever became President.…I've known every president since Harry Truman and there's no question in my mind that [Reagan] was the worst.” This is a severe indictment by a highly qualified observer. Nevertheless it is an opinion that will be challenged here. It will be argued in this article that far from being the “worst” of recent presidents Ronald Reagan, despite his failings, was more effective in office than most who have held the position in the last fifty years. However, as a preliminary to our analysis it may be useful to summarize the apparently formidable case against Reagan.
1 Man of the House, (New York: Random House, 1987), 360.Google Scholar
2 The Triumph of Politics (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1986), 48, 95.Google Scholar
3 For a discussion of American public opinion in the 1970s see Ladd, Everett Carll and Lipset, Seymour Martin, “Public Opinion and Public Policy” in Duignan, Peter and Rabushka, Alvin, eds., The United States in the 1980s (London: Croom Helm, 1980).Google Scholar
4 For a powerful attack on Reaganomics see Peterson, Peter G., “The Morning After,” The Atlantic Monthly, 10 1987, 43–69.Google Scholar
5 The Observer, 30 11 1986, 13.Google Scholar
6 Presidential Power (New York: New American Library, 1964), vii.Google Scholar
7 Quoted phrase ibid.
8 Kellerman, Barbara, The Political Presidency (New York: Oxford University Press), 12.Google Scholar
9 See for example Hodgson, Godfrey, All Things To All Men (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1980), Ch. 3.Google Scholar
10 Nathan, Richard, “Institutional Change under Reagan” in Palmer, John, ed., Perspectives on the Reagan Years (Washington DC: The Urban Institute Press, 1986), 128.Google Scholar
11 Especially for students of politics. According to Frederick M. Watkins political science should be “concerned not with the potentially infinite content of all public decisions, but with the process by which those decisions are reached.” Charlesworth, James C., (ed.), A Design For Political Science: Scope, Objectives and Methods (Philadelphia: The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1966), 28.Google Scholar
12 The need to guard against this danger is reflected in a recent poll amongst members of the American Political Science Association. This revealed that in assessing Reagan's overall performance in office 71 percent of respondents who were Republicans rated him as Excellent or Good while 29 percent found him to be Fair or Poor. 96 percent of Democrats meanwhile found him to be Fair or Poor, whereas only 4 percent rated him as Excellent or Good. Roettger, Walter B. and Winebrenner, Hugh, “Politics and Political Scientists,” Public Opinion (09/10 1986), 41–44.Google Scholar
13 Ladd, Everett, “The Brittle Mandate; Electoral Dealignment and the 1980 Election,” Political Science Quarterly 96 (Spring 1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Chubb, John and Peterson, Paul, (eds.), The New Directions in American Politics (Washington DC: The Brookings Institution, 1985), 21.Google Scholar
15 See Ornstein, Norman J., (ed.), President and Congress: Assessing Reagan's First Year (Washington DC: AEI, 1982), 89.Google Scholar
16 Nathan, , op. cit., 127.Google Scholar
17 Op. cit, 341.
18 Hogan, Joseph, “The Office of Management and Budget and Reaganomics” in Lees, J. D. and Turner, Michael, (eds.), Reagan's First Four Years (Manchester: Manchester University Press 1988), 118.Google Scholar
19 Peterson, Paul et al. , Federalism Works (Washington DC: The Brookings Institution, 1986), 2.Google Scholar
20 Ferguson, Thomas and Rogers, Joel, Right Turn: The Decline of the Democrats and the future of American Politics (New York: Hill and Wang, 1986), 124.Google Scholar
21 Weekly Report, 9 08, Vol. 44, No. 2, 1797–1801.Google Scholar
22 Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 07 18–24, 1988, 7.Google Scholar
23 Seidman, Harold and Gilmour, Robert, Politics, Position and Power, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 4th Edition, 127.Google Scholar
24 Revolution (New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1988), 438Google Scholar. Anderson was one of the “comrades” although also an academic. In any case his judgement stands on its own merits.
25 Time, 4 04 1988, 36–37.Google Scholar
26 Sunday Times, 18 12 1988.Google Scholar
27 The Guardian, 5 02 1988.Google Scholar
28 Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 10 17–23 1988, 36.Google Scholar
29 Lipset, Seymour Martin and Schneider, William, “The Confidence Gap During the Reagan Years,” Political Science Quarterly, 102, (Spring 1987), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30 Ibid.
31 See especially Mandelbaum, Michael, “The Luck of the President” in Hyland, William G., (ed.), The Reagan Foreign Policy, (New York: New American Library, 1987), 127–46.Google Scholar
32 David Osborne argues that vision is an essential presidential requirement found in Roosevelt, Franklin and Reagan, Ronald, but missing from Carter, Jimmy and Dukakis, Michael. “On a clear day, he can see Massachusetts,” The Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 04 25–05 1, 1988, vol. 5, No. 27, 24–25.Google Scholar
33 Interview “Seeing Daylight,” Playboy magazine, 03 1988.Google Scholar
34 Mandelbaum, op. cit.
35 See Schick, Allen, “How the Budget Was Won and Lost,” in Ornstein, op. cit.Google Scholar
36 The Twilight of the Presidency (New York: New American Library, 1970).Google Scholar
37 Quoted in Cannon, Lou, Reagan (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1982), 306.Google Scholar
38 See Greenstein, Fred, The Hidden Hand Presidency: Eisenhower as Leader (New York: Basic Books, 1982).Google Scholar
39 Op. cit., 375.
40 Sceptics might also refer to Wildavsky, Aaron, “President Reagan as Political Strategist,” Society (05/06 1987), 56–62Google Scholar. The essence of Wildavsky's argument is that Reagan is a “superb political strategist.”
