Reagan Ties
Ronald Reagan changed the course of American politics and lifted American morale. It was no wonder then that his years in the White House were looked to by many as eight years of superior leadership. Yet some judged the Reagan years as a step back from the ideals American people upheld before, like helping the poor and balancing the budget. Although the opinions of the public split, all could agree that those eight years were colorful pages in the American history. Many symbols came to mind at the mention of Reagan and his administration, but few of them captured the complexity of this political figure. Yet, if one was to choose an image on a tie for an American Historical Association, scissors would be the most appropriate choice. Ronald Reagan cut his ties with the Democratic Party, riding on the edge of the eventual political shift to the right. He came to be known to the American public as the great tax-cutter, though it was not entirely true. He trimmed the government spending for social programs and he cutout a place for himself in the history of Soviet-US conflict.
Ronald Reagan was on the cutting edge of politics, preceding by more than a decade the eventual shift from liberalism to conservatism majority of Americans made. He was raised in a Democratic household, becoming a “passionate Roosevelt” admirer as a college student (Pemberton 14). Reagan maintained his ties to the Democratic Party until years after World War II. Then due a number of circumstances, he rapidly cut those ties, leaving many liberal organizations he supported in the early 1940s (Pemberton 30). By 1964, when he gave his famous speech “The Time for Choosing” during a campaign for Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan was an established conservative Republican (Pemberton 53). Still, the conservatives were a minority in Washington and only a small percentage of the American people, who were directly involved in the grassroots movement, were aware of this immerging political ideology (McGirr 113). But in four short years, the “political pendulum” swung to the right and promised to stay there for the next three decades (Brown 13). Whereas 1960s and 1970s were the years when many Americans, like Peggy Noonan, severed their ties to the Democratic Party, Ronald Reagan was already an established conservative. He was on the tip of a wave of the conservative movement, cutting out a new chapter in American politics.
Throughout his political career, Ronald Reagan became known to the public as a tax-cutter. Although he ran his 1966 with the promise of massive tax-cuts, to salvage the California’s budget, Reagan had to raise the income and sales taxes (Pemberton 73). The circumstances played into his hands; Californians praised the minimal property tax cut, but blamed the previous governor for the raised taxes (Pemberton 73). Reagan’s image as a “father of the growing tax revolt” emerged (Pemberton 5). He carried the same tax-cut scissors to the national arena, when he ran for president in 1980 election. As a president, even in sight of a growing deficit, he pushed through Congress the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, which ensured 10 percent decrease in income taxes for two years in a row, and many other similar tax cuts (Pemberton 102). Still Ronald Reagan had different reasons for slashing taxes. If as a governor, he rebelled against the burden of high taxation, as a president, reducing taxes was part of the economic strategy (Boyer 113). Whatever the reason might have been, cutting taxes was evidently an essential part of Ronald Reagan’s political image. Therefore, it is appropriate to have scissors as a symbol for his years in public office.
Ronald Reagan’s tendency to trim the government social spending was also a prominent aspect in his political career. As early as late 1940s he began to see the “evils of big government” (Pemberton 30). Reagan ran his 1966 campaign with promises of cutting back on government spending. He fulfilled those promises when he froze state hiring and cut the “expenditures by 10 percent across the border” in this first year as governor (Pemberton 73). But he did not only hack at spending, he trimmed existing programs, like the welfare system to “purify” as well as cut back the costs (Pemberton 79).Ronald Reagan carried to the White House the same mentality that the government was too big and spent too much. But on the national scale, the trimmings scissors turned into a butcher knife. Although Reagan advocated “prudent level” for government spending, the policy concerned only the social spending (Boyre 106). The goal was to cut the spending by more than $75 billion (Pemberton 98). By 1984, the Reagan administration promised to lay off 300,000 federal workers (Boyre 112). Small social programs like food stamps, school lunches, child nutrition, housing assistance, low-income energy assistance were roughly trimmed (Pemberton 140-141). Even education department and highway funds felt the nick of the scissors (Boyre 117). Yet at the same time as less fortunate Americans cried out for “adequate welfare” and “job programs”, Reagan upped the military spending (Ehrenreich 187). Since military spending was part of the federal budget, it would be inadequate to claim that Reagan’s scissors worked on the entire budget. He picked and chose which programs fell under the blade. Yet, it is evident that cutting social spending was a big part of the Reagan era.
Finally, Ronald Reagan cut out a unique niche for himself in the history of Soviet-US relationship. The administration had little interest in negotiating with the Soviets, until the defense build-up was well on its way (Fitzgerald 183). Ronald Reagan, a prominent Anti-Communist, viewed Soviet Union as an “evil empire” (Pemberton 150). Yet by 1983, Ronald Reagan saw the conflict in a new light. There were members of his administration who, like well-respected Weinberger, had “little interest in negotiating with the Soviets” (Pemberton 151). Reagan disregarded their old views in favor of starting to build Soviet- US relationship anew (Pemberton 161). He made his first cut with the former attitudes, even when he was accused of going soft on the communists (Pemberton 165). Reagan “pushed to open a dialogue with Moscow”, forging a better relationship with the leader of Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev (Pemberton 165). Together they worked on arms-control. In 1988, Ronald Reagan made a historical trip to the Soviet Union, declaring it no longer the “evil empire” it once was (Boyre 251). No other US president after World War II was able to get so far ahead in negotiations with the Soviets. Surely scissors were an appropriate symbol for a man who stubbornly sliced through opposition in the administration and cut out a unique place for himself in the history of Soviet-US conflict.
Although there were a number of symbols that could represent Ronald Reagan, scissors were the most appropriate. They represented his turn to conservatism decade ahead of the nation, his image as a tax cutter, and as a trimmer of social government spending. Finally the scissors symbolize how he cut a niche for himself in the history of the warring super powers. Therefore, no tie made to represent the Reagan era could exist without an image scissors proudly stitched on it.
Ronald Reagan changed the course of American politics and lifted American morale. It was no wonder then that his years in the White House were looked to by many as eight years of superior leadership. Yet some judged the Reagan years as a step back from the ideals American people upheld before, like helping the poor and balancing the budget. Although the opinions of the public split, all could agree that those eight years were colorful pages in the American history. Many symbols came to mind at the mention of Reagan and his administration, but few of them captured the complexity of this political figure. Yet, if one was to choose an image on a tie for an American Historical Association, scissors would be the most appropriate choice. Ronald Reagan cut his ties with the Democratic Party, riding on the edge of the eventual political shift to the right. He came to be known to the American public as the great tax-cutter, though it was not entirely true. He trimmed the government spending for social programs and he cutout a place for himself in the history of Soviet-US conflict.
Ronald Reagan was on the cutting edge of politics, preceding by more than a decade the eventual shift from liberalism to conservatism majority of Americans made. He was raised in a Democratic household, becoming a “passionate Roosevelt” admirer as a college student (Pemberton 14). Reagan maintained his ties to the Democratic Party until years after World War II. Then due a number of circumstances, he rapidly cut those ties, leaving many liberal organizations he supported in the early 1940s (Pemberton 30). By 1964, when he gave his famous speech “The Time for Choosing” during a campaign for Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan was an established conservative Republican (Pemberton 53). Still, the conservatives were a minority in Washington and only a small percentage of the American people, who were directly involved in the grassroots movement, were aware of this immerging political ideology (McGirr 113). But in four short years, the “political pendulum” swung to the right and promised to stay there for the next three decades (Brown 13). Whereas 1960s and 1970s were the years when many Americans, like Peggy Noonan, severed their ties to the Democratic Party, Ronald Reagan was already an established conservative. He was on the tip of a wave of the conservative movement, cutting out a new chapter in American politics.
Throughout his political career, Ronald Reagan became known to the public as a tax-cutter. Although he ran his 1966 with the promise of massive tax-cuts, to salvage the California’s budget, Reagan had to raise the income and sales taxes (Pemberton 73). The circumstances played into his hands; Californians praised the minimal property tax cut, but blamed the previous governor for the raised taxes (Pemberton 73). Reagan’s image as a “father of the growing tax revolt” emerged (Pemberton 5). He carried the same tax-cut scissors to the national arena, when he ran for president in 1980 election. As a president, even in sight of a growing deficit, he pushed through Congress the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, which ensured 10 percent decrease in income taxes for two years in a row, and many other similar tax cuts (Pemberton 102). Still Ronald Reagan had different reasons for slashing taxes. If as a governor, he rebelled against the burden of high taxation, as a president, reducing taxes was part of the economic strategy (Boyer 113). Whatever the reason might have been, cutting taxes was evidently an essential part of Ronald Reagan’s political image. Therefore, it is appropriate to have scissors as a symbol for his years in public office.
Ronald Reagan’s tendency to trim the government social spending was also a prominent aspect in his political career. As early as late 1940s he began to see the “evils of big government” (Pemberton 30). Reagan ran his 1966 campaign with promises of cutting back on government spending. He fulfilled those promises when he froze state hiring and cut the “expenditures by 10 percent across the border” in this first year as governor (Pemberton 73). But he did not only hack at spending, he trimmed existing programs, like the welfare system to “purify” as well as cut back the costs (Pemberton 79).Ronald Reagan carried to the White House the same mentality that the government was too big and spent too much. But on the national scale, the trimmings scissors turned into a butcher knife. Although Reagan advocated “prudent level” for government spending, the policy concerned only the social spending (Boyre 106). The goal was to cut the spending by more than $75 billion (Pemberton 98). By 1984, the Reagan administration promised to lay off 300,000 federal workers (Boyre 112). Small social programs like food stamps, school lunches, child nutrition, housing assistance, low-income energy assistance were roughly trimmed (Pemberton 140-141). Even education department and highway funds felt the nick of the scissors (Boyre 117). Yet at the same time as less fortunate Americans cried out for “adequate welfare” and “job programs”, Reagan upped the military spending (Ehrenreich 187). Since military spending was part of the federal budget, it would be inadequate to claim that Reagan’s scissors worked on the entire budget. He picked and chose which programs fell under the blade. Yet, it is evident that cutting social spending was a big part of the Reagan era.
Finally, Ronald Reagan cut out a unique niche for himself in the history of Soviet-US relationship. The administration had little interest in negotiating with the Soviets, until the defense build-up was well on its way (Fitzgerald 183). Ronald Reagan, a prominent Anti-Communist, viewed Soviet Union as an “evil empire” (Pemberton 150). Yet by 1983, Ronald Reagan saw the conflict in a new light. There were members of his administration who, like well-respected Weinberger, had “little interest in negotiating with the Soviets” (Pemberton 151). Reagan disregarded their old views in favor of starting to build Soviet- US relationship anew (Pemberton 161). He made his first cut with the former attitudes, even when he was accused of going soft on the communists (Pemberton 165). Reagan “pushed to open a dialogue with Moscow”, forging a better relationship with the leader of Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev (Pemberton 165). Together they worked on arms-control. In 1988, Ronald Reagan made a historical trip to the Soviet Union, declaring it no longer the “evil empire” it once was (Boyre 251). No other US president after World War II was able to get so far ahead in negotiations with the Soviets. Surely scissors were an appropriate symbol for a man who stubbornly sliced through opposition in the administration and cut out a unique place for himself in the history of Soviet-US conflict.
Although there were a number of symbols that could represent Ronald Reagan, scissors were the most appropriate. They represented his turn to conservatism decade ahead of the nation, his image as a tax cutter, and as a trimmer of social government spending. Finally the scissors symbolize how he cut a niche for himself in the history of the warring super powers. Therefore, no tie made to represent the Reagan era could exist without an image scissors proudly stitched on it.