NP Rank:
The Dangerous Reagan Cult
By Robert Parry
In the debt-ceiling debate, both Republicans and Democrats wanted Ronald Reagan on their side. Republicans embraced the 40th president’s disdain for government and fondness for tax cuts, while Democrats noted that “even Reagan” raised the debt limit many times and accepted some tax increases.
But Reagan – possibly more than any political leader – deserves the blame for the economic/political mess that the United States now finds itself in. He was the patriarch for virtually every major miscalculation that the country has made over the past three decades.
It was Reagan who slashed taxes on the rich to roughly their current level; he opened the flood gates on deficit spending; he accelerated the decline of the middle class by busting unions and slashing support for local communities; he disparaged the value of government regulations; he squandered money on the Pentagon; he pushed more militaristic strategies abroad; and he rejected any thoughtful criticism of past U.S. foreign policies.
Reagan also created what amounted to a “populist” right-wing cult that targeted the federal government as the source of nearly all evil. In his First Inaugural Address, he famously declared that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
It is that contempt for government that today is driving the Tea Party extremists in the Republican Party. Yet, as with many cults, the founder of this one was somewhat more practical in dealing with the world around him, thus explaining some of Reagan’s compromises on the debt ceiling and taxes.
But once the founder is gone, his teachings can become definitive truth to the disciples. Flexibility disappears. No deviation is permitted. No compromise is tolerated.
So, at a time when government intervention is desperately needed to address a host of national problems, members of this Reagan cult apply the teachings of the leader in the most extreme ways. Since “government is the problem,” the only answer is to remove government from the equation and let the corporations, the rich and the magical “market” dictate national solutions.
It is an ironic testament to Ronald Reagan’s enduring influence that America’s most notable “populist” movement, the Tea Party, insists that tax cuts for the wealthy must be protected, even minor ones like tax loopholes for corporate jets. Inside the Tea Party, any suggestion that billionaire hedge-fund managers should pay a tax rate equal to that of their secretaries is anathema.
Possibly never in history has a “populist” movement been as protective of the interests of the rich as the Tea Party is. But that is because it is really a political cult dedicated to the most extreme rendering of Ronald Reagan’s anti-government philosophy.
http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/72-72/7071-the-dangerous-reagan-cult


Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (9)
at 01:05 on August 18th, 2011
Was the Reagan Administration the most corrupt ever
at 04:37 on August 18th, 2011
It may have been corrupt, but he wouldn't know because he was out to lunch during most of it, if you know what I mean.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
"thirty-aught-six" (not verified)at 06:19 on August 18th, 2011
Economic Committee report April 2000
In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were funda-mental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982.
Under President Reagan, federal revenues increased even with tax cuts, federal spending did not decrease, the country experienced the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime in its history, and the rich paid more taxes proportionately than they had before the tax cuts were implemented.
Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue.
As a percentage of the gross domestic product (GDP), federal revenues declined only slightly from 18.9 percent in 1980 to 18 percent in 1990.
Revenues from individual income taxes climbed from just over $244 billion in 1980 to nearly $467 billion in 1990.5 In inflation-adjusted dollars, this amounts to a 25 percent increase.
This economic boom lasted 92 months without a recession, from November 1982 to July 1990, the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime and the second-longest period of sustained growth in U.S. history. The growth in the economy lasted more than twice as long as the average period of expansions since World War II.
In 1991, after the Reagan rate cuts were well in place, the top 1 percent of taxpayers in income paid 25 percent of all income taxes; the top 5 percent paid 43 percent; and the bottom 50 percent paid only 5 percent.
The proportion of total income taxes paid by the top 1 percent rose sharply under President Reagan, from 18 percent in 1981 to 28 percent in 1988.
Average effective income tax rates were cut even more for lower-income groups than for higher-income groups. While the average effective tax rate for the top 1 percent fell by 30 percent between 1980 and 1992, and by 35 percent for the top 20 percent of income earners, it fell by 44 percent for the second-highest quintile, 46 percent for the middle quintile, 64 percent for the second-lowest quintile, and 263 percent for the bottom quintile.
These reductions for the lowest-income groups were so large because President Reagan doubled the personal exemption, increased the standard deduction, and tripled the earned income tax credit (EITC), which provides net cash for single-parent families with children at the lowest income levels. These changes eliminated income tax liability altogether for over 4 million lower-income families.
if one counts the Social Security payroll tax, the share of total federal taxes increased between 1980 and 1989 for the following groups:
For the top 1 percent of taxpayers, from 12.9 percent in 1980 to 15.4 percent in 1989;
For the top 5 percent of taxpayers, from 27.3 percent in 1980 to 30.4 percent in 1989; and
For the top 20 percent of taxpayers, from 56.1 percent in 1980 to 58.6 percent in 1989.
at 12:20 on August 18th, 2011
President Reagan’s employment record was only marginally better than President Obama’s at the same point in Reagan’s presidency.
President Reagan’s tenure began with unemployment at 7.5%, only 30 basis points lower than it was when President Obama first assumed office in January 2009. However, the average unemployment rate for President Reagan’s first two and a half years in office was 9.0%. The unemployment rate under President Obama has averaged 9.4%. In essence, Reagan’s employment record at this point was only marginally better than Obama’s is.
Also after President George W. Bush sent Congress an outline of his tax reform plan, critics immediately began to attack it as a return to what they portray as the fiscally irresponsible policies of the Reagan Administration. According to these commentators, Congress should scale back--if not outright reject--President Bush's tax reform proposals because they are based on a period when the wealthy received excessive tax cuts and revenue was wasted on defense even though most Americans struggled in poverty.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
"thirty-aught-six" (not verified)at 13:13 on August 18th, 2011
According to those commentators. Who were anti-Republican. Anti-conservative and wanted to thwart any policy GW Bush put forward. What goes around comes around and now we have the Tea Party working against Obama policy. So much for "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you!"
at 19:38 on August 19th, 2011
" So much for "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you!" "
In real world, it's usually "do unto others as they've done unto you."
- Sign In or Join to post comments
matt stefanovich (not verified)at 07:55 on August 19th, 2011
as a european I believe, that its true, that you have Tea party in America because of Obama. yet it is only due to a false portraying of Obama as a politician. He is portrayed as radical leftist, a socialist, a troskyite. Its absolutely false. His problem is , that he is from mixed marriage, born in Hawaii, strong critic of Iraq war and not so much in touch with {for ex. } southern ordinary people as Clinton was, when he was elected. All in all, Obama is pretty good president. He must be careful not to pose as elitist and intellectual. when he keeps up his "elan" he is going to be elected second time.
at 20:03 on August 19th, 2011
Whenever I hear people portray Obama as a socialist or a leftist or (ahem) a Communist, a Marxist or a totalitarian, I tell them that if he had been any such things they would be in labor camps or dead. That they are instead free to spread their propaganda, often using government-built Internet of all places, means that Obama is no such thing.
Clinton was from a mixed-marriage situation as well. The most militantly anti-Clinton people were in the South, some were in the Midwest, but he carried a number of Southern states. These people were very loud under both Clinton and Obama, attacking Clinton for personal reasons even though his policies benefited them - and attacking Obama for policy reasons even though his lifestyle is what they want people to have. They attempted to depose Clinton and, under Obama, they created the Tea Party claiming that they are Americans and that the other 250 million Americans aren't.
It's beneficial for the other 250 million to make it known that the Tea Party does not represent them and has no business claiming to be America.
at 06:24 on August 20th, 2011
lol..I like the way you think ishambat..lol
"It's beneficial for the other 250 million to make it known that the Tea Party does not represent them and has no business claiming to be America."