June 11, 2004
WHAT THE CONTRASTS DON'T TELL:
Reagan, Bush Contrasts Are as Telling as Parallels (Dan Balz, June 11, 2004, Washington Post)
"They're obviously similar in that they've both set a limited number of broad goals and are willing to stick to them even when the going gets tough," GOP pollster Whit Ayres said. "They've both been aggressive toward this country's adversaries -- Reagan against communism, Bush against terrorism. They both were vilified by the left."The contrasts are equally vivid. Reagan remains the Great Communicator, a description rarely applied to the current president. Bush's television commercials this spring have been punctuated by his references to being optimistic, but the persona he has more often projected in leading the war on terrorism is less optimistic than determined, less upbeat than grimly unwavering. Although he was known for his wisecracking personality as a candidate, post-Sept. 11 he has used humor less often and to less effect than Reagan.
Both Bush and Reagan got their way with Congress in their first years in office. Bush's success ratings, as compiled by Congressional Quarterly, are actually higher in each of the first three years, the highest since the presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson.
But Bush has had a more distant relationship with Congress. Reagan developed friendships with two powerful Democrats, one of them House Speaker Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill (Mass.). Bush has not, and administration officials blame Democrats for not meeting the president halfway. But some Congress watchers say the problem is that Bush listens less and commands more in his dealing with Congress than Reagan did.
"Reagan loved the give-and-take with the Congress," said a former Reagan administration official who declined to be identified in order to offer a candid appraisal. "He loved the stories, he was captivated with the theatrics. [Bush] has the problem of a closely divided Congress where every last vote counts, and there may be less of a desire to spend more time socializing than there needs to be."
Reagan and Bush talked about reining in the federal government, but with both the deficit mushroomed. A study released yesterday by the American Enterprise Institute found that Bush has been far less aggressive in cutting spending. Nondefense outlays, adjusted for inflation, fell by 9.7 percent in Reagan's first term but have risen 25.3 percent during Bush's.
Reagan and Bush shared a warm relationship with Christian conservatives, but Bush has been far more attentive to their political agenda.
"The relationship [with Christian conservatives] is much more intimate because the force of their power within the Republican Party is much more significant" today than it was during Reagan's presidency, said a former Christian Coalition leader who asked not to be identified in order to speak freely about the relationship.
The most significant difference between Bush and Reagan, critics of the current president say, is how the two leaders affected the nation's image in the world.
One of the more amusing exercises the past few days has been watching the Left try to argue that the Reagan events will hurt President Bush. This piece is all over place, arguing correctly that Mr. Bush--though less eloquent--is more conservative and has been more successful, then offering the canard that Europeans (Old Europe) respected Ronald Reagan and Reagan's America.
