NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
INTRODUCTION It is widely accepted that George Bush Snr. was forced to play out his presidency in the mighty shadow of Ronald Reagan. Reagan's charm and personality was one of his greatest strengths and, even now, is widely revered for his time as President. Bush was reportedly always conscious of people's expectations of him in view of his predecessor and this burden seemed to weigh heavily.
Reagan's achievements in Washington were considerable if not in number than in impact. His political and strategic skills were impressive and Bush cannot be said to have equaled his achievements certainly at home, and this is borne out by Bush's failure to win re-election. Nevertheless Bush made some staggeringly important contributions to the international arena and is deeply respected for his part in world events where there is every reason to suspect that Reagan would not have been. The huge differences between the two are even more interesting given that Bush was a dutiful Vice President to Reagan for eight years and sought on gaining office only to take over where he left off. Bush did not set out to ring the changes between Reagan and himself; quite the opposite. He purported to be the archetypal guardian president; consolidating Reagan's good work and continuing to steer America on the same path.
So why then did they turn out to be such almost polar opposites? This essay explores the realms of domestic politics, vision and leadership and international issues with the focus on drawing comparison between the two men and their styles of leadership and analysing in each instance who may have been the more effective president. I will conclude that, regardless of actual achievements real success in presidential terms depends on successful handling of the media, an area Reagan understood and Bush never would. IMAGE, PERSONALITY, AND MEDIA RELATIONS It is almost universally agreed that Ronald Reagan's greatest strength, certainly early in his first term and arguably until he left office was his ability to communicate with the American people.
He won the presidency not only on his package of radical reforms at a time when the current policy orthodoxies had failed the Americans (along with most of the rest of the western world), but on his winsome personality, his awesome eloquence and his considerable charisma. A direct comparison with Margaret Thatcher can be drawn as regards the radical package of reforms, however Reagan enjoyed much higher levels of personal popularity than 'Thatcher the Milk Snatcher' back in Britain. By direct comparison, George Bush, despite having been elected on a higher majority of the popular vote than Reagan, was more of an 'establishment politician'. It has been said that Bush "knew probably more Americans than any other human being has ever known", and it is well documented that he (perhaps namely) expected these relations to carry over into the decision-making arena. He was reluctant to go over the heads of his friends and colleagues by using the bully pulpit; and was painfully conscious of his shortcomings as a mass communicator. On the other hand, he knew well that his strength lay in well-informed discussion on a smaller-scale, and for this reason chose the press conference as his most frequent point of contact.
Where the Reagan White House was determined to 'stage-manage' all media coverage (even going as far as to set a 'line of the day', and allegedly making up quotes where the president has nothing to say), Bush was determined that he was to be more open and accessible to the press. To this end he left it to the press to decide what area of policy to focus on, and held some 280 press conferences in four years, as against Reagan's 47 in eight. This difference in style was not purely to do with Bush's lack of speaking ability, although he was conscious that he was unable to be another Reagan. Rather it was indicative of the inherent difference in style of the two presidents. Where Reagan was a conviction politician bringing in reform and new ideas, Bush was the guardian president, putting emphasis on conciliation and consolidation. Reagan's White House put the utmost priority on making the evening news, but Bush's less confrontational style of leadership was ultimately less newsworthy and he went out of his way to prove himself unimpressed by gimmickry, believing he could gain favourable coverage by treating the media with respect and allowing them autonomy.
DOMESTIC POLICY RECORD Short Term Aims Reagan's biggest achievement was the fiscal 1982 budget, first submitted to Congress on the 10 th March 1981. Its passage, albeit in amended form, was secured through some intelligent political manoeuvring. The President continually used the Bully Pulpit to appeal to the public. His first year strategies were short term in nature; his social policies took a back seat to economic considerations. By being careful not to spread himself too thin, he maximised his chances of success on those areas where he concentrated his efforts. It can be argued that this increasing emphasis on the short term depended not only on his sagacity in reading the limited possibilities of his role (facing a hostile democrat majority and an increasingly media-savvy public), but mainly on in an increasing trend in the political sphere as a result of 'political impatience'.
The nature of the political system does not reward long-term strategic thinking; short, sharp action is more likely to be passed by congress than fundamental long-term change, and policies with immediate and tangible results are more likely to impress the voting public and bring the ultimate reward; re-election. Those Budget Reforms Having thrown his weight behind the Gramm-Latta compromise, which closely resembled his original budget proposal, Reagan managed to get it through congress earning considerable respect from the press in the process. However on discovering that Democrat subcommittees were using their discretionary spending powers to negate the effects of the bill. The best response to this problem was unclear; to challenge Congress (and win) with an amendment to Gramm-Latta to be put to a single for or against vote would show tremendous strength in leadership and legitimacy; to lose would be a huge blow to the administration.
Reagan's advisors made it clear that to win would be difficult; there was less than a week to prepare. Reagan went into action quickly and decisively, trading on favours, compromising with individual Congressmen, and persuading. House Democrats voted in favour of Gramm-Latta II by 217 to 210. The New York Times put that Reagan had "proved that the presidency remains a pre-eminent force, provided only that its occupant knows how to combine an election victory with a sense of executive priority and bargaining skill" Bush's Record In complete contrast, Bush has very little to his credit by way of domestic policy initiatives.
On being asked what he considered his most important achievements he referred to education, childcare, the environment and his appointments. There is little to suggest that he actually had much significant influence in these areas; he may well have had a genuine interest in some of them, education can hardly be seen to have benefited to any great extent from a man who, on coming into office declared he wanted to be known as the education president. Those measures which did pass under his term were likely to have gone through without him. Nevertheless, Bush made good and strategic use of his right to veto, using it successfully to veto more legislation than any other president since Ford. This is not necessarily the passive manoeuvre it may seem, as a president can make, or threaten, use of the veto to pass compromises acceptable to the White House in place of the vetoed bill. Where he can justly claim credit is his appointments to the judiciary; his influence through appointments covers areas close to his heart (abortion, affirmative action, religious freedom and legal rights) and he can lay claim to 185 federal district and circuit court judges, and two Supreme Court justices.
Bush is widely criticised for his conciliatory relationship with Congress; in sharp contrast to Reagan's 'hands-on' methods of vote-trading and favour-exchanging, he attempted to rely on personal relationships cultivated over the years, little realising that they would count for almost nothing on Capitol Hill. Bush and Reagan's Legacy The short-terms of Reagan's presidency severely hindered Bush in his first and only term as president. During his eight years as President, Reagan failed to once submit a balanced budget proposal to Congress and the deficit inherited by Bush was $ 152 billion and rising; the Reagan administration for all its talk of cutting spending had raised it by 25 % in real terms whilst tax changes were tax neutral, leaving Bush very little room for manoeuvre. To a certain extent we could argue that Bush suffered unfairly at the hands of Reagan in not being able to fund the programs in which he professed an interest, particularly education. Responsibility must surely rest with him, however, for the political damage sustained by his inevitable reneging on the "Read my lips: No new taxes" pledge of his election campaign. Overall, it is generally agreed that the Bush l...
Free research essays on topics related to: white house, long term, george bush, ronald reagan, short term
Research essay sample on Ronald Reagan George Bush
