HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025297.jpg

Laffer Associates
Game On [Updated 7/6/2016]

In fact, the whole group of us received virtually no support from the Republican Party or the Party’s elders. It wasn’t until Reagan had finally defeated George Bush, along with John Connally, Howard Baker, Phil Crane, Bob Dole and John Anderson in the primary race, that there was any attempt to be conciliatory to Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign by the Republican powers that were. Even Barry Goldwater, whose career owed so much to Ronald Reagan, was cool at best to a Reagan presidency.

I remember one post-Bush-defeat meeting of our committee when we had already secured the nomination and George Herbert Walker Bush sat next to me and lightly apologized for referring to me as the “Voo-Doo Economist.” In truth, I had sort of enjoyed the handle, and told H.W. Bush that I was delighted he finally had come to join us because I needed some fellow Yalies to up the quality of our group. He laughed.

Things had been so vitriolic and bad during the primary campaign that a number of Republicans couldn’t in clear conscience support Ronald Reagan at all and others could only support him in name only. And one of the primary contestants, John Anderson, Republican Congressman from Illinois, was so offended by Ronald Reagan’s nomination that he decided to run as an independent in the general election, which he did. While, in hindsight, John Anderson’s decision may now seem like a non-event, it sure wasn’t seen as a frivolous gesture back then. Ronald Reagan looked like a sure loser with both a moderate Republican opponent and a sitting Democratic President, with all the privilege, prestige and power that the Office of the President holds.

At the convention in Detroit City, I testified before the platform committee on what I thought Reaganomics would be—which was lots of fun. But, the real drama occurred when it came time to select Ronald Reagan’s running mate. Showing no signs of remorse or respect for the primary voters, the Party’s establishment conspired to browbeat Ronald Reagan into accepting Gerald Ford as Ronald Reagan’s co-president running mate. They—the establishment—were absolutely certain that Ronald Reagan would be blown away by Carter in November of 1980 and that the down ticket Republican candidates would get their lunch handed to them. So much for the wisdom of Republican elders and insiders.

In other words, just like today in re Donald Trump, the party’s cognoscenti were forecasting a huge Reagan defeat that would carry with it large numbers of House members and Senators. Reagan, they thought, would prove to be more devastating to Republicans than either the Goldwater defeat of 1964 or the Ford defeat of 1976.

As you all know, none of this happened. We handily defeated Carter, even though we were behind in the polls as recently as 1 week before the election.4 Reagan took 44 states and 50.7% of the popular vote to Carter’s 41% of the vote and Anderson’s 6.6% of the vote. Whodathunkit? I’m naturally an optimist, but I’ve never been more optimistic than I am today or than I was in 1980, and I’ve never had more fun than I had in the several years before Ronald Reagan’s election. The Reagan saga of 1980 seems a lot like the Trump story today.

II. “It’s the Economy Stupid” – James Carville 1992
In the 2016 primaries, each and every Republican candidate promised lower tax rates, restrained government spending, sound money and greatly lessened regulations. The mantra was repeal “Obamacare,” eviscerate Dodd-Frank and cut taxes. There couldn’t have been a more supply-side, pro-growth field of candidates assembled in the entire history of our nation—not one outlier. It almost became a Republican feeding frenzy as to who could propose the lowest tax rate and create the most growth. Debates on economic issues were super boring and hyperbole as to who could be the most pro-growth supply sider infused the air we breathe. In truth, every Republican, from Jim Gilmore to Donald Trump, understood that America was in free fall and needed a huge dose of incentive alignments. There was very little room for debate on the issues because the candidates all agreed with each other.

The Democrats, once O’Malley, Webb and Chafee exited stage left, were pulling each other further and further to the “Free Lunch Tax the Rich” ticket. Already way over-subsidized, students were promised free college by Sanders, and America would have a $15 federal minimum wage everywhere. And then there was expanded free health care, huge tax increases on Wall Street exploiters and on the rich in general. The Walton family was singled out as the perfect example of what’s wrong with America: one family whose net worth was close to $150 billion and whose legacy company, Walmart, paid workers’ wages so low that full-time employees qualified for welfare. The Democrats defined their enemies as the most successful innovators, investors, job-creators and employers in America.

The Democrats also, in their never-ending debates, careened further and further toward “from each according to his ability and to each according to his need” paradise. The most enthusiastic crowds were energized by the endearing, wild-eyed, septuagenarian Socialist whose unkempt, long white hair became emblematic of “enough is enough already”: Uncle Bernie Sanders. Who doesn’t love Bernie Sanders? Or, as his throngs of acolytes scream, who doesn’t “feel the Bern?”

4 Reagan’s surge in polls is generally attributed to the presidential debate held one week before the election took place, on October 28th, immediately after which Reagan appears to have moved into a 3 point lead. See: Lydia Saad, “Late Upsets Are Rare, but Have Happened,” Gallup, October 27, 2008. http://www.gallup.com/poll/111451/late-upsets-rare-happened.aspx

2

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025297