To what extent did Reagan have an impact on the presidencies of Bush and Clinton?
President George HW Bush, 1988 to 1992
The 1988 election
1) He had been the Vice-President for Reagan – discreet and loyal. He faced Michael Dukakis, a traditional liberal governor of
Massachusetts. Bush chose Dan Quayle as his VP candidate, who was a figure of fun. Bush stood by him, mainly because he
championed ‘family values’ which appealed to the Religious Right. This suggests that the Reagan Revolution had had an
impact.
2) This judgement is reinforced by the fact that Bush had Reagan’s endorsement and the general feeling that Reagan had been a
successful President. This link to Reagan was reinforced by Bush’s popular promise – ‘read my lips – no new taxes’, which was
classic Reaganomics.
3) Bush won with 53% of the popular vote, compared to Dukakis gaining 45.6%. However the Democrats took control of the
House and Senate, suggesting the Reagan revolution did not produce a new coalition of voters which dominated American
politics or political thinking.
4) In addition, Bush, according to his own staff, ‘never accepted the need for an overarching vision. He is the embodiment of
pragmatism’. (Saunders) He tended to dismiss what he called ‘the vision thing’. This suggests that Reaganism did not change
American politics. This was emphasised by Bush’s inaugural address, where he stressed the need for bi-partisanship, helping
the homeless (promised ‘to make kinder the face of the nation’ in his inaugural address) and reducing the growing deficit. He
also pointed out that money and possessions were not the most important things in life, which was a very different focus from
Reagan’s.
5) Voter turnout was the lowest since 1942, which suggests that Reagan did not revitalise politics after all! This was reinforced
by Bush’s subsequent lack of skill before the cameras.
His Presidency
1) By 1990, given the ever-growing budget deficit left by Reagan, Bush finally had to agree to introduce new taxes. Conservative
Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, opposed this tax hike, ‘which damaged the Republicans in the 1990 and 1992 elections’.
Saunders
2) His Presidency included a number of actions that can be seen as examples of ‘big government’ in action. These included the
Clean Air Act (1990), which showed that environmental issues were not favoured by just a few on the left, the Disabilities Act
(in the face of great business opposition to the cost), and he compromised with Congress on a minimum wage law (1989). All
of these suggest the Reagan Revolution had a limited impact.
3) However Bush refused to spend more on education, despite having seen that there was a problem with standards (‘America
2000’); twice he vetoed Democratic proposals to grant family and medical leave, plus a civil rights bill to counter racial
discrimination in employment. Almost 25% of the bills he vetoed were designed to make abortion easier, including abortions
for victims of rape or incest. All of this suggests the Reagan Revolution had had an impact.
4) This view is contradicted by Bush’s decision not to appoint an anti-abortion candidate for the Supreme Court when there
was a vacancy; instead he nominated David Souter, whose views were unknown, because Bush knew that the issue divided
America and the parties. However one can take the opposite view when in mid-1991, Bush nominated an African American
conservative, Clarence Thomas, who had expressed public doubts about abortion, busing, quotas and affirmative action. He
was confirmed by the Senate (52-48), a continuation of Reagan’s judicial revolution.
The 1992 election
1) The first Gulf War had produced a massive boost in Bush’s popularity, but this was undone by the recession of 1990 to 1992.
By 1992, this had meant the economy had lost 2 million jobs. This was a key cause of Bush’s defeat.
2) Bush’s tax hike and soft-pedalling on the New Right social agenda led to a challenge from the Right-wing of the Republican
party, leading to Pat Buchanan giving the key note speech to the National Convention – this can be seen as the Reagan
Revolution as both having and not having an impact!!
3) Clinton won, which seemed to show that the country was swinging back to the left, suggesting the Reagan revolution was
not having an impact. However this is not true. Clinton won 43% of the popular vote compared to Bush gaining 38%, yet
Dukakis won 46% of the popular vote! Also Bush’s share of the vote went down by 15%, yet a third candidate, Ross Perot, won
19% of the popular vote; 70% of those voters said they would have voted for Bush if Perot had not stood as candidate.
President George HW Bush, 1988 to 1992
The 1988 election
1) He had been the Vice-President for Reagan – discreet and loyal. He faced Michael Dukakis, a traditional liberal governor of
Massachusetts. Bush chose Dan Quayle as his VP candidate, who was a figure of fun. Bush stood by him, mainly because he
championed ‘family values’ which appealed to the Religious Right. This suggests that the Reagan Revolution had had an
impact.
2) This judgement is reinforced by the fact that Bush had Reagan’s endorsement and the general feeling that Reagan had been a
successful President. This link to Reagan was reinforced by Bush’s popular promise – ‘read my lips – no new taxes’, which was
classic Reaganomics.
3) Bush won with 53% of the popular vote, compared to Dukakis gaining 45.6%. However the Democrats took control of the
House and Senate, suggesting the Reagan revolution did not produce a new coalition of voters which dominated American
politics or political thinking.
4) In addition, Bush, according to his own staff, ‘never accepted the need for an overarching vision. He is the embodiment of
pragmatism’. (Saunders) He tended to dismiss what he called ‘the vision thing’. This suggests that Reaganism did not change
American politics. This was emphasised by Bush’s inaugural address, where he stressed the need for bi-partisanship, helping
the homeless (promised ‘to make kinder the face of the nation’ in his inaugural address) and reducing the growing deficit. He
also pointed out that money and possessions were not the most important things in life, which was a very different focus from
Reagan’s.
5) Voter turnout was the lowest since 1942, which suggests that Reagan did not revitalise politics after all! This was reinforced
by Bush’s subsequent lack of skill before the cameras.
His Presidency
1) By 1990, given the ever-growing budget deficit left by Reagan, Bush finally had to agree to introduce new taxes. Conservative
Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, opposed this tax hike, ‘which damaged the Republicans in the 1990 and 1992 elections’.
Saunders
2) His Presidency included a number of actions that can be seen as examples of ‘big government’ in action. These included the
Clean Air Act (1990), which showed that environmental issues were not favoured by just a few on the left, the Disabilities Act
(in the face of great business opposition to the cost), and he compromised with Congress on a minimum wage law (1989). All
of these suggest the Reagan Revolution had a limited impact.
3) However Bush refused to spend more on education, despite having seen that there was a problem with standards (‘America
2000’); twice he vetoed Democratic proposals to grant family and medical leave, plus a civil rights bill to counter racial
discrimination in employment. Almost 25% of the bills he vetoed were designed to make abortion easier, including abortions
for victims of rape or incest. All of this suggests the Reagan Revolution had had an impact.
4) This view is contradicted by Bush’s decision not to appoint an anti-abortion candidate for the Supreme Court when there
was a vacancy; instead he nominated David Souter, whose views were unknown, because Bush knew that the issue divided
America and the parties. However one can take the opposite view when in mid-1991, Bush nominated an African American
conservative, Clarence Thomas, who had expressed public doubts about abortion, busing, quotas and affirmative action. He
was confirmed by the Senate (52-48), a continuation of Reagan’s judicial revolution.
The 1992 election
1) The first Gulf War had produced a massive boost in Bush’s popularity, but this was undone by the recession of 1990 to 1992.
By 1992, this had meant the economy had lost 2 million jobs. This was a key cause of Bush’s defeat.
2) Bush’s tax hike and soft-pedalling on the New Right social agenda led to a challenge from the Right-wing of the Republican
party, leading to Pat Buchanan giving the key note speech to the National Convention – this can be seen as the Reagan
Revolution as both having and not having an impact!!
3) Clinton won, which seemed to show that the country was swinging back to the left, suggesting the Reagan revolution was
not having an impact. However this is not true. Clinton won 43% of the popular vote compared to Bush gaining 38%, yet
Dukakis won 46% of the popular vote! Also Bush’s share of the vote went down by 15%, yet a third candidate, Ross Perot, won
19% of the popular vote; 70% of those voters said they would have voted for Bush if Perot had not stood as candidate.
