1/10
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
|---|
No study sessions yet.
Immediate action
Control government spending, reduce government involvement and cut taxes
Influenced by ‘supply side’ economic theories
The theory suggested the economy wasn’t driven by consumer demand but by keeping up production and encouraging saving and investment
Believe in restraints on production (government regulation, high taxes and strong unions) should be removed
The better-off would benefit and benefits would ‘trickle down’ to the poor
Sacked many White House staff members and put a federal government hiring freeze in place
Told all departments there was a freeze on office furnishing and equipment and that they had to cut their travel expenses by 15%
Used a series of executive orders to set up advisory groups, reporting directly to him, on how to cut down on ‘big government’
Made him look very active, but financial savings were small
The plan for reform
Reagan wanted to present his whole budget policy through to 1984 as a single bill when he met Congress on 18 February, and present a tax bill in the same session
His Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) had no time to follow the usual procedure for budget planning
This meant that Congress had to vote on the whole package of spending cuts, so the administration would have approval for all its measures and control over the timetable up to 1984
Reaganomics
Cutting the federal deficit
Accompanied by a budget bill and a proposal for cuts on domestic spending
Budget bill aimed to reduce the federal deficit from 22% of the GNP in 1981 to 19% in 1986
Put together so hastily that it had many errors and a footnote that admitted that the plan included ‘as yet identified’ cuts of $76 billion, to be decided later
Personal and business tax reductions
Accompanied by the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981
Deregulation
Removing federal control in industry, state and local government
Planned control of the money supply
To keep inflation down while expanding the economy
The suggested cuts in domestic spending came almost entirely from federal grants for specific projects set up under Johnson’s ‘Great Society’ reforms
Grants to state and local government bodies for slum clearance and highway repair
Local initiatives in education, housing and the provision of various services, such as the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) programme
Getting the legislation passed
Easy to pass the budget
For the first time in decades there was a Republican majority in Senate and almost a Republican majority in the House of Representatives
Only 26 Democrat votes were needed in the House
Became law in August as the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 (ORA)
Tax legislation battle
The Senate passed it with one change (cut tax reduction for personal tax from 30 to 25%)
The Democrats felt they had been manipulated over the budget and saw the tax bill as a fight over control of the House and made significant changes
The White House offered tax concessions to some Democrats to swing the vote, while the Democrats counter-offered incentives in areas they controlled
Reshaped bill passed in August as the Economic Recovery Tax Act 1981 (ERTA)
Cut marginal income tax by 23% over 3 years and linked tax bands to inflation; those paying the higher tax benefited the most
The highest income tax band rate fell from 70 to 50%; the lowest fell from 14 to 11%
All working taxpayers were allowed to set up untaxed IRAs (Independent Retirement Accounts)
Business tax rates were cut and businesses could revise their depreciation costs; these were usually calculated years in advance so suffered from inflation
Business tax breaks were offered, skewed to favour small, innovative businesses
Economic legislation and other measures
1981 Executive Order setting up the President’s Economic Advisory Board
Sets up EAB with economics experts from outside the government advising directly to the president, as well as the CEA
1981 Executive Order setting up the President’s Commission on Housing
Set up to investigate all aspects of housing, including how it should be financed, but mainly to find ways of saving money on federal low-cost housing schemes
1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA)
Cut marginal income tax by 23% over 3 years, links tax bands to inflation and offers other incentives
1981 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (ORA)
Proposes a variety of tax cuts that will take $35 billion out of federal spending; the initial bill had proposed $45 billion worth of cuts
1982 Tax Equity and Financial Responsibility Act (TERFA)
Makes changes to the budget in response to the economic situation, tightening up tax rules, especially for businesses
Temporarily raises taxes on cigarettes and the telephone service
1986 Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act (COBRA)
Revises the budget in many minor ways to save the federal government money and to move costs to state or private bodies
The most significant change shifts the responsibility for many healthcare payments from the federal government to the employer
1986 Tax Reform Act
Revises the tax codes, reducing the number of tax brackets
Supposed to close a lot of tax evasion loopholes and ease the pressure on poorer families
Stopping inflation and unemployment:
While ORA and AERTA were going through Congress, Reagan put pressure on the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) to put tighter restrictions on the money supply and it did
Unlike previous administrations, Reagan didn't ask the FRB to lift these restrictions once unemployment rose
The money supply restriction led to a sharp rise in interest rates.
This hurt industries that had to buy supplies on credit (e.g. the car industry, farming) or had loans with a long pay-back period (e.g. construction)
Many businesses were badly hit
Reagan came to power in the middle of a recession; then it deepened
Unemployment rates went from 7.1% of the population available for work in 1980 to a high of 9.6% in 1983
By 1988, the rate had gone down to 5.5%
The percentages of people in part-time or temporary work had risen; not earning at their full capacity
Businesses were reorganising to pay out as little as possible; temporary or part-time employees were not paid on yearly salary rates and the insurance and other extra payments made for them were lower or non-existent
The number of people not included in unemployment figures (as they were considered unemployable, such as through drug use, or chose not to register for work) was 34.5% of the population in 1988
Inflation, which had been 11.3% in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980, began to fall.
In 1982, it was down to 6.2%
Although it moved up and down after this, by 1996 it had never reached double figures again and spent most of its time under 5%
Increasing personal wealth
Everyone agrees that tax cuts made many people richer; in that sense they worked
Some historians say the rich became richer and the poor did not; the cut in tax bracket for the rich was the deepest and therefore they benefited the most
Others argue that tax cuts hurt the rich most and poor least, and tax payments of the rich helped the revival of the economy
Increasing productivity
Output per worker per hour
Lowest: 1982 (-1)
Highest: 1983 (4.5)
Gross National Product (GNP) growth
Lowest: 1982 (-2%)
Highest: 1984 (7.25%)
Encouraging people to save and invest
As the economy came out of the recession, towards the end of 1982, and businesses began doing well again, more people began to save and invest
However, policies to cut down ‘big government’ led to deregulation in the financial sector
Increased competition led to problems, as financial organisations took increasingly dangerous risks to win more customers
The personal savings and investments that the policies had been designed to encourage took place in a financial environment that was increasingly unsafe
This came to a head in the late 1980s, with people losing both savings and investments during a crisis in the savings and loans industry (that only government intervention stopped) and the stock market crash of 1987
Recovery from this was far more rapid than the recovery from the 1929 Wall Street Crash
The FRB stepped in, encouraging banks to lend to each other and business and individual investors not to panic
A significant number of individuals and businesses suffered, but not on the scale of the Great Depression
Reducing the deficit
One of Reagan’s most notable failures
In 1980, it was $59 billion; paying it off cost 9% of federal spending
In 1983, it was $208 billion; paying it off cost 14% of federal spending
Loan interest payments were increasingly funded by borrowing from abroad. For the first time, the USA became a significant borrowing nation, not a lending nation
Failure was partly because of Reagn’s determination to cut taxes, despite the fact that it soon became clear that supply-side arguments didn’t work
Federal departments resisted cuts, while Congress toned down many welfare cuts planned by the administration
Reagan reversed the pattern of the late 1960s and 1970s of cutting defence spending and increasing spending on human resources
In 1980, human resources took 28% of federal spending; by 1987, it was 22%
In 1980, defence spending took 23% of federal spending; by 1987, it was 28%
After Reagan
George H. W. Bush
Promised to continue Reagan’s policies
However, these policies were increasingly less popular as their long-term effects and limitations became clear
Bush had only just won the presidential election; political, media and public support were lukewarm
The Democrats were back in control of both houses of Congress, making it harder for his administration
Bush was often forced to back down on promises - the most famous being when he raised taxes, despite promising in his campaign that he wouldn’t
Bill Clinton
Democrat elected in 1992
Did not swing back to old Democratic policies
While Reagan’s economic policies had produced problems, most voters strongly supported low taxes - a return to high taxation was not an option
Clinton was a ‘New Democrat’. His campaign was economy-focused:
Low inflation
High employment
A reduced deficit
No tariffs to regulate business and trade
His nod to older Democrats was in increasing welfare and medical care and ‘investing in people’