Washington, D.C. (6/8/2009) -- Age may seem like a superficial factor to consider, in regards to the president of the United States. I mean, does it really matter if the person is a parent or a grandparent? Maybe, maybe not. What is interesting to note is this: two American presidents within the past twenty-five years have entered office in the midst of a huge economic slump. These two men, Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama, are our nation’s oldest and youngest leaders.
Arguably, with age comes experience and wisdom—two concepts that do play a big role in determining the future of our country and when it will eventually emerge from recession.
Frank Donatelli, a former advisor to President Reagan, said that all presidents blame their predecessors for the inconvenient problems that they face. Donatelli spoke at a panel discussion comparing the economics of President Ronald Reagan and current U.S. President Barack Obama on Friday, hosted by the Young America’s Foundation (YAF).
Donatelli said that history has proven his point: Reagan blamed Carter, Obama blames Bush. Both men entered office with the urgent need to pull America out of an economic recession, but they had different ways of doing that.
The comparison could be made on many different levels. Donatelli noted that both presidents acknowledged that the two major problems within the United States were ignorance and apathy. Reflecting on his days on the campaign trail with Reagan, Donatelli spoke about seeing these qualities within the American voting population. He recalled a man participating in a conversation with Reagan outside of a store. Reagan asked the man what he should do about the economy and the man answered: “I don’t know and I don’t care.”
This sentiment has been (and still is) adopted by the American people in response to many political matters. People become so absorbed in their own lives, schedules, and the demands of family life, that they feel overwhelmed by the idea of active citizenship. It is this philosophy that has created the devastating bankruptcy of the modern era.
Regan said, in commenting on the failed economy of 1980, that well-grounded patriotism was no longer the style. He saw the need for a re-institutionalization of freedom. In order to accomplish this, Reagan knew that he had to empower the younger generations. Just like Obama is right now.
Kate Obenshain, former chairman of the Virginia GOP and vice president of the Young America’s Foundation, said that she believes that President Obama has the same insight as Reagan did almost thirty years ago. However, he does not plan to revive the same ideal of individual freedom within democracy; Obama has an entirely different agenda. Instead, he desires to re-institutionalize the idea of government power in the form of European socialism.
“Obama gets it (the need to empower young people),” said Obenshain. “And that’s scary!”
Donatelli stated that, although the word on the street is that the Obama administration faces the worst economic disaster that America has seen since the Great Depression in the 1930s, that is actually not the case. When comparing Enhanced Misery Index (EMI) numbers, today’s EMI is at 14.5, whereas, the EMI when Reagan entered the white house was an astounding 38.3. Therefore, according to the Enhanced Misery Index, we aren’t in nearly as much trouble now, as we were twenty to thirty years ago.
In light of the recession—big or small—President Obama saw the need for embodying young people. Yet, he did so by convincing younger generations that government is the answer; if we let the government take control over our education, healthcare, and personal lives, then it will save us in the end from economic failure. That is not the case.
The government is causing our country to slide further and further into economic crisis. According to California Congressman Tom McClintock, Obama is causing the United States to sink deeper and deeper into debt every day. Re-defining the American Dream, Obama wants to play the Robin Hood of the 21st century. Instead of encouraging American free trade and capitalism (economic standards upon which our country was founded), Obama is stealing from the rich to give to the poor. And it’s all under the guise of taxes.
McClintock said that with Obama’s plan to tax “couples” with an annual income of 250,000 dollars or more per year, he is actually targeting small businesses. When these small businesses start to feel the heat, he said that they are simply going to close down or move out of the country, as they did in California. In the end, the negative impact of the loss of commercial revenue on the economy will far outweigh the federal tax income. This will push the economy farther into ruin.
Friday, the New York Times’ Deal Book reported that this week Steven A. Ballmer, the chief executive of Microsoft, will be moving many of its jobs overseas, in the event that the Obama proposals are enacted. They are doing exactly what McClintock said would happen to American businesses: they are giving up and leaving.
The Young America’s Foundation panel did more than just discuss politics on a rainy afternoon in Washington D.C. It spoke to a room full of 150 young U.S. citizens about their future and their president.
The message was simple: Reagan pulled this country out of recession through deregulation. Obama is trying to achieve economical success by doing the exact opposite--but perhaps with a slightly different result.
By Catherine Moore, camoore@bu.edu
