Mr. Speaker, yesterday was the official end of the period of national mourning for former President Ronald Reagan. During this month there have been many tributes to this great President, all of which were deserving. Recently, I was given…
Mr. Speaker, yesterday was the official end of the period of national mourning for former President Ronald Reagan. During this month there have been many tributes to this great President, all of which were deserving.
Recently, I was given a copy of a book review by the well-respected Administrative Law Judge John C. Holmes, who is now retired. In August 1998, Judge Holmes reviewed Dinesh D'Souza's book, Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader. It was an excellent review that summed up how so many of us view Ronald Reagan and his life. I would like to submit the review for the Record and I commend it to my colleagues.
[From the Free Press, 1997]
Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader
(By Dinesh D'Souza)
Dinesh D'Souza, who served briefly as a low-level advisor
to President Reagan in 1987-88, is an open admirer of
Reagan's accomplishments. Yet not even Reagan's harshest
critics are more revealing of his character flaws and human
weaknesses. Rather than expressing scorn and derision,
however, the author is in turn bemused, delighted, curious,
and intrigued in candidly reporting the former president's
character and personality idiosyncrasies. After careful
examination, he concludes that Reagan's very real limitations
in fact assisted as much as deterred this seemingly ordinary
man in becoming an extraordinary leader. Beneath his apparent
simplicity was a complex and sometimes contradictory person.
For example, Reagan's sunny personality and near continuous
optimism masked a psychological curtain that could descend on
even his most intimate friends and family, keeping them at a
distance. There was also the contradiction that, while
constantly extolling the virtue of the family and its values,
Reagan exhibited a disjointed personal one, having been
divorced from his first wife, Jane Wyman, and distant from
his son, daughter, and stepdaughter. Reagan's acknowledged
short attention span masked a tenacious adherence to those
principles and policies that concerned him most. His good-
natured jokes and story-telling, sometimes criticized as
irreverent and irrelevant, served to disarm and win over
adversaries from Tip O'Neill to Mikhail Gorbachev. His famous
line in the presidential debate with Walter Mondale that he
``would not use Mondale's youth and inexperience against
him'' caused an involuntary grin and chuckle from his
surprised opponent, totally diffusing the increasingly
serious campaign issue of Reagan's age, and propelling Reagan
into one of the largest presidential victories ever. He loved
pomp and cavorted with the wealthy, but had a singular
capacity to connect with, and was beloved by, the common man.
The author dispels or modifies some public misconceptions.
While Reagan himself self-deprecatingly joked about his nap
times, he worked sometimes grueling hours, particularly for a
man of his age, exhibiting strong discipline in doing
homework on those issues he needed to know. His discipline in
keeping physically fit probably saved his life early in his
presidency when he was the recipient of a would-be assassin's
bullet that lodged less than an inch from his heart. His
character was revealed during this frightening time when
despite the seriousness of the situation he could
extemporaneously joke to his wife Nancy: ``Honey, I forgot to
duck!'' and to his treating physicians: ``I hope you're all
good Republicans.'' Such good humor in the face of adversity
won him a reservoir of good will by an appreciative public.
taking on the ``evil empire''
Reagan was a naive, rosy optimist, thinking that, if he
could only show Gorbachev how ordinary Americans lived,
Gorbachev would recognize the differences between the two
systems and make big changes for the better. Reagan was a
foolhardy, almost comical belligerent, standing at the Berlin
Wall and challenging Gorbachev to ``tear down this wall!'' He
was an embarrassment, a blind, unsophisticated patriot who
had the gall, bad manners, and political incorrectness to
call the free world's adversary an ``Evil Empire.'' He was an
actor who knew nothing of foreign policy, a genial dummy who
straddled between reckless action and somnolent inattention.
Or so he was portrayed and so many believed.
But D'Souza recognizes Reagan's historic accomplishment in
fostering the dissolution of the Communist empire, which
emanated at least in substantial part from the man's own
willful, steadfast purpose. This dissolution was not
foreordained, as has become the fashionable view. The author
demonstrates the transparency of Reagan's critics, quoting
extensively from their pronouncements on the growth,
stability, and power of the Soviet economy and the folly of
attempting directly to challenge Russia itself. Liberal
historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. observed in 1982 that
``those in the United States who think the Soviet Union is
on the verge of economic and social collapse are wishful
thinkers.'' John Kenneth Galbraith, Harvard economist and
guru during the Kennedy-Johnson years, pronounced that
``the Russian system succeeds, because, in contrast with
the Western industrial economies, it makes full use of its
manpower.'' Such assessment was concurred in by even
``neutral'' economists such as Paul Samuelson and Lester
Thurow, who as late as 1989 marveled at the Russian growth
process.
As for confronting Russian expansion, Sovietologist Stephen
Cohen of Princeton University thought that Reagan was
pathologically wrongheaded in apparently abandoning the
comforting previous policies of containment and detente for
the objective of ``destroying the Soviet Union as a world
power and possibly even its Communist system.'' Strobe
Talbot, then a senior correspondent at Time magazine and
later deputy secretary of state in the Clinton
administration, indignantly scoffed at Reagan's unrealistic
and misguided attempts to return to the '50s goal of rolling
back Soviet domination in Europe.
Though criticized as too ideological, Reagan appointed
skilled pragmatists to implement his aggressive foreign
policy. They included the maligned but effective Bill Casey
at the CIA, Cap Weinberger at Defense, and George Schultz at
State. Reagan's overarching plan was relatively simple: he
would outspend the Russians on defense, thereby showing the
vulnerability of the Russian economic system which Reagan,
almost alone, was convinced would not keep pace. This
culminated in the proposed future deployment of defense
missiles and lasers dubbed ``Star Wars,'' a concept ridiculed
by many, and not fully understood even by Reagan, but greatly
feared by the Russian leadership. D'Souza presents the still-
minority viewpoint, which I believe history will eventually
confirm, that the elevation by the Russian leadership of
Gorbachev was largely stimulated as an antidote for the very
presence of Reagan, who by then had emerged as a popular and
effective world leader who articulately advocated challenge
of Russian aspirations for world dominance. Reagan took an
immediate liking to Gorbachev and instinctively felt they
could do business. His subsequent perseverance in challenging
Gorbachev to reform the system, combined with U.S. military
buildup, precipitated the eventual dismembering of the
formerly impenetrable Russian political hegemony and military
might.
For this accomplishment alone Reagan should be recognized
as the single most important person in the second half of
this century in pointing our world in the direction of
freedom and democracy. However, to the surprise and even
anguish of liberal opponents, and the consternation of some
conservative friends, his challenge was not limited to the
communist totalitarian system, but to dictators everywhere,
whether in the Philippines, South America, or Africa. The
resulting extensive conversion from socialist and
totalitarian states to democracies and free economies was
truly remarkable, never before seen in the history of the
world.
taking on big government
As Reagan ran against the political wisdom and apparent
majority public opinion in advocating defeat of, rather than
detente with, communism, so too he opposed the belief that a
powerful central government was essential to ensure freedom,
justice, and the general welfare. Reagan presented the then-
heretical view that central government was the problem, not
the solution. While Reagan accepted much of Roosevelt's New
Deal as a necessary reaction to the economic emergency
following the Great Depression, he felt the Great Society
agenda fostered by President Johnson took the country too far
along the path toward a suffocating central government that
would eventually stifle individual initiative and freedom.
His conversion from Democrat to Republican resulted.
Reagan carried his message forward in speech after speech,
initially while traveling the country for General Electric.
Although the 1964 Republican Convention produced the
spectacularly losing campaign of Barry Goldwater, Reagan's
nominating speech--which has been since dubbed merely ``The
Speech''--launched him into the national scene as the future
messenger and leader of the conservative cause. It also
brought him to the attention of king-makers in California,
who lured him into a successful run against the incumbent,
the firmly entrenched Governor Pat Brown, who, like every
candidate Reagan has run against, underestimated his talents,
personality, and character.
As Governor, Reagan preached austerity, but in his first
term did little in practice to put California's economic
house in order. His main contribution, perhaps, was in
standing up to the most radical of the free speakers, thereby
keeping the universities open and restoring a modicum of
stability during those turbulent times. The author labels
Reagan's governorship as only moderately successful. Reagan,
however, gained a stage that eventually catapulted him into
the presidency.
While running for and entering the presidency, his economic
message remained the same: limited government. On the one
hand, as his critics are quick to point out, Reagan never
directly achieved his economic goals, as the high cost of
defense build-up and his insistence on a tax cut made a
balanced budget impossible. Moreover, this imbalance was
exacerbated by the Democratic-controlled Congress, whose
``compromise'' meant more spending on cherished domestic
programs rather than cuts that would have helped pay for the
defense build-up. On the other hand, his intense lobbying
efforts on his first budget, while not reaching all the
results he envisioned, provided the mechanism for a future
more limited domestic spending program, and provided more
funds for the private sector through tax cuts. Through a
numbing recession in 1982, with critics contending his
``voodoo'' supply-side economics were a proven failure,
Reagan elected to ``stay the course,'' retreating to his
California ranch for resuscitation and refusing the siren
song to ``do something.'' He was assisted by a supportive
Federal Reserve, which tightened credit to reduce the
fever of double digit inflation prevalent during the
preceding Carter administration. With recover came
increasing public and business confidence. A growing
economy meant more dollars to pay for the defense build-
up.
The author points to the ``outrageous'' act of firing the
air traffic controllers as a further plank in economic
recovery. Though their union, the Professional Air Traffic
Controllers (PATCO), was one of the few to support Reagan's
presidential bid, Reagan had no compunction in firing them
and replacing them by non-union workers. Considering them
``untouchables,'' no previous president had so directly taken
on unions and government workers. To Reagan, the moral basis
was simple: government workers were servants of the people
and not their masters. The law supported his viewpoint.
Condemned, ridiculed, and pressured even by allies, and
temporarily losing popular support, particularly from new-
found ``Joe Six-Pack'' converts to the Republican party,
Reagan stuck to his guns. This action, and his subsequent
refusal to compromise, so shocked and silenced union leaders
and government workers that corporations and government
agencies were afforded for years to come the opportunity to
downsize and ``reorganize.'' The seemingly forgotten
principal that jobs were a privilege and not a right was at
least partially restored and the economy further stimulated.
Reagan's goals were not all achieved while in office.
Nevertheless, he left an agenda that is still in many
respects being followed today. Free international trade
through agreements such as NAFTA, and the outline for fiscal
savings as drawn up in the ``Contract for America,'' were
Reagan initiatives. Even the line-item veto, scorned and
laughed at as a campaign throw-away, and impossible to enact,
has become law, ironically co-opted by President Clinton and
touted as his own accomplishment. While temporarily
contributing to a huge unbalanced budget and an unfavorable
foreign trade deficit, the successful war against communism
eventually allowed a resulting ``peace dividend,'' a
prosperous economy, and a curtailed federal government. A
balanced budget would be achieved 10 years after he left
office.
Reagan again knew instinctively what the most sophisticated
economists were oblivious to. Reduction of tax rates during
times when government has become too large and costly can
actually increase total revenues by freeing the private
sector from stifling governmental costs and regulations,
thereby enabling sales and profits (as well as taxes paid) to
rise. What was to become known worldwide as ``privatization''
resulted from these policies. Where previous Republican
administrations had merely attempted to cut around the edges
to make governments a little more efficient and accountable,
Reagan attacked it head on, by word and deed freeing the
private sector to accomplish its goals with minimal
intervention.
Taking on ``malaise''
A third area that Reagan sought to change flowed naturally
from and was dependent upon success in his attack on
communism and big government: restoration of the prestige and
respect of the presidency, and the confidence, optimism, and
patriotism of the American people. Following the ``Peace and
Prosperity'' and ``Return to Normalcy'' of the 1950s under
Eisenhower, we had experienced the assassinations of
President Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy;
the quagmire of Vietnam, causing President Johnson's decision
not to run; Nixon's seemingly moderately successful
presidency brought down by Watergate; and the failed Carter
presidency, ending in American hostages being ignominiously
held in Iran, communism seemingly on the march in
international expansion, and Carter himself describing a
``malaise'' in the American psyche. Onto the stage strode the
unlikely candidate the conservatives lusted for, but
mainstream Republicans merely tolerated, and Democrats
welcomed as ``easy pickings''--seemingly too old, too
ideological, and too inexperienced to be elected or to
accomplish the job.
The reigns of government had barely been grasped when a
sickening feeling of deja vu returned as an attempt was made
on Reagan's life. Reagan's humorous reaction and relatively
quick recovery boded well, allowing him to initiate his
foreign and domestic programs. The sputtering of the economy
in late 1981, leading to recession, however, dispelled this
good will and left the nation in a
sullen mood. As recovery finally came and Reagan's ``stay the
course'' was more or less vindicated, his personality and
talents as a ``Great Communicator'' began to sharpen and
shape the American and world landscape. He entreated the
people of the United States, the country he felt destined to
be ``a shining city on the hill,'' to support and further his
program and policies. He restored a sometimes teary-eyed
patriotism, encouraging Americans to take pride in and
celebrate our country, its meaning, and its history. Using
his powers as a former actor and the sincerity of his own
belief in the goodness of America, whose ``morning had just
begun,'' he sought to enlist the people to assist the world
along a better path to a brighter future. He returned a pride
in military service, severely wounded since the Vietnam war.
His own dedication to duty and pride of office restored
dignity and world leadership to the presidency.
History may record Reagan as having been extraordinarily
lucky to have accomplished his successes at such an advanced
age, barely before senility and the eventual ravages of
Alzheimer's disease fully took over. D'Souza does not think
so. He credits--too much, some will argue--Reagan's ability
to cut through the thicket of unimportant matters and take
the correct action at nearly every important juncture. Far
from being a mere bystander, Reagan led on matters that
mattered, even when his decisions were unpopular.
D'Souza notes a nearly mystical aura that President Reagan
himself privately acknowledged as governing some of his
actions. While many presidents donned the mantra of
churchgoing for public consumption, and Reagan himself
supported, mainly as a sop to the religious right, a
constitutional amendment to allow public school prayer, his
own religious beliefs were more complex. Not an active
churchgoer before or during his presidency, he apparently
firmly believed in an intervening and active higher authority
from whom he privately sought solace and guidance. When asked
what person he most admired, Reagan invariably answered,
``The man from Galilee.'' Though public ridicule was made of
his wife Nancy's seeking guidance from astrologers, without
serious objection and perhaps active support from the
President, Reagan's truer belief would have been the
personally delivered opinion of Mother Theresa that he had
been put on this earth for a divine purpose.
This book will not find favor with liberal economists, with
those Jeanne Kirkpatrick labeled ``Blame America Firsters,''
or with apologists for the former Soviet communist system who
then had advocated accommodation and appeasement, but many of
whom now find its demise historically inevitable and Reagan
irrelevant. One of D'Souza's obvious purposes in the book is
to attack this attempted instant historical revisionism. In
so doing, he can fairly be accused of straying too often from
a ``pure'' chronicle of Reagan to a strident attack on his
critics. No doubt in anticipated rebuttal, D'Souza points to
a ``stacked deck'' committee chaired by Arthur Schlesinger
Jr. and commissioned by the editors of the New York Times in
December 1996 to render a collective verdict on how history
will rank the U.S. presidents. Not surprisingly these
``history experts,'' which included Doris Kearns Goodwin,
James MacGregor Burns, ex-Governor Mario Cuomo, and ex-
Senator Paul Simon, liberals all, ranked Reagan in the lower
half, below George Bush and in the undistinguished company of
Jimmy Carter, Chester Arthur, and Benjamin Harrison. In
contrast, D'Souza believes Reagan should be ranked with the
Roosevelts, Wilson, Lincoln, and Washington.
Interestingly, however, the ideologically conservative
``true believers'' who allege that Reagan was merely a
popular messenger for an irresistible movement will not be
overjoyed with the book. D'Souza paints Reagan as a unique
individual, the likes of which are unlikely to return. Though
Reagan articulated the principals of the ascending
conservative movement, he was flexible rather than rigid, and
his sunny personality lent itself to compromise on everything
except his hardcore principals. This enabled Reagan to
overcome popular reluctance to accept his conservative
agenda.
D'Souza describes an apparently simple, but actually a
flawed, complex, and contradictory man who accomplished his
aims by concentrating on a few specifics that were
fundamental to his beliefs. To this reviewer, who was
initially extremely skeptical of Reagan's governing
capability, let alone his electability to the presidency, but
who has come to the happy realization that there really was
something in the stars that brought forth this unlikely man
to lead our country at such an important time in history,
Ronald Reagan gets it exactly right.