Page 4 University Daily Kansan, June 10, 1982
Analysis
Ronald Reagan stars in a classic American role
By JOE BARTOS Editorial Editor
In the 20th century, the rise of mass media has made the cultivation of a public persona an important part of advertising.
Franklin K. Roosevelt, the first great media president, used radio appearances and newspaper coverage to project an image of effective action and resolve in a desperate period of American history. A generation later, another master of media, John P. Kennedy, established a picture of himself as a youthful, dynamic and glamorous person, easily dealing with the print and electronic press.
But few presidents have tended their image with as much skill, ease and effect as Ronald
Like Roosevelt and Kennedy, Reagan has a flair with mass media and has used this ability to bolster his popularity and boost his programs. But, unlike these two great presidents, Reagan has pursued an image of a conservative, almost reactionary nature.
As opposed to the new social programs and progressive foreign policies of Roosevelt and Kennedy, Reagan seeks a return to private enterprise, military expansion and other elements of American policy that were typical around the turn of the century. In keeping with his policies, many men steeped in the American past—behind his policies and persona lie the American Way.
A nebulous but powerful notion, the American Way is an attitude of cheerful self-reliance, horse sense and divine morality that is our heritage as a people. Formed on the frontier and in the factories of an emerging nation, it is a common, mythical ideal.
It is an ideal that Ronald Reagan both preaches and practices. His economic policy of gogo growth is a result of his optimism, while his support of increased private enterprise and
In addition to cheerful self-reliance, Reagan is powered by divine morality. Manifesting itself both as a sense of decyce and a belief in the divine righteousness of his cause, this traditional morality is at the base of Reagan's ties to groups advocating moral issues such as prayer in the face of persecution and oppression to the Equal Rights Amendment and at the base of his vehement foreign policy.
defense spending reveal his underlying impulse of self-reliance.
While his belief in the American ideals of optimism, self-reliance, decency and divine authority is the fundamental force behind his policies, Reagan's public image is also a manifestation of that same power. And that persona is the source of his strength with the American public.
Time and time again, Ronald Reagan is able to tap the force of Americans' shared belief in the American Way. Through his masterful grasp of the medium of television, Reagan is capable of more than just communicating his faith in the Way—he radiates it. Every word, every reaction and every video nuance is the act of a man who is the incarnation of our shared ideal.
When Ronald Reagan appears on television to defend his policies, he does so in simple, emphatic terms. It makes no difference whether he is explaining in a few words what experts have written volumes about - convinces because he sounds like he knows what he is talking about.
When Reagan is chastised in the press for "mispeaking," he reacts like a man whose integrity has wrongly been impun. It doesn't matter whether he was actually inaccurate—what convenues us is that he acts like a man who has been wronged.
They want to believe in simple solutions to complex problems, they want to believe in a return to a glorious past and they want to believe in an absolute authority. But most of all, they want to believe in the comforting, familiar ideal of the American Way.
No doubt a large part of Reagan's effectiveness is his seasoned skill as an actor. But no actor could play as successfully as a teacher, but this receptive American public wants to believe him.
In times of crisis for his administration, Ronald Reagan appears on television to appeal to the American public. A skilled actor, he plays upon the deep, almost conscious faith of the public in the American Way, to marshal support for his presidency and his policies. As long as his credibility remains intact, his appeal will remain unstoppable.
Democrats alternatives humorous Sensible solutions offered by Reagan
By JOHN SCARFFE
Columnist
The foundations of supply-side tax theory are logically irrefutable, given that one recognizes the essential rationality of the human animal. Simply put, once one accepts that a tax rate of 100 percent would provide less than-optimal revenue to the taxing government (in this case because the taxes would all starve), one must accept that the tax rate that would provide optimal government revenue is something less than 100 percent. Such a tax rate would be low enough to ensure that it would not deter workers in their rational search for increased earnings.
In reality, the congressional budget deadlock demonstrates that silence is the president's best weapon. The United States Congress has never been noted for its intellectual depth, and the current comic-opera over the budget is beginning to take on the characteristics of a Keystone Kops film. Our men in Washington need no help from the White House in demonstrating their utter inability to produce any sort of alternative economic policy, liberal or conservative.
Logic, however, has always been at a premium in Washington. The current chaos on Capital Hill bears little resemblance to the coward Congress of 1981, and impatient supply-siders are beginning to wonder just when the president will commence cracking the whip. The Great Communicator has remained curiously silent within Washington's recent economic firestorms, allowing old-guard liberal Democrats ample opportunity to thunder at the cameras about the coming fiscal Aramageddon without response from the White House.
some time to come, and it's only a matter of time before the president jumps in, guns blazing.
Economic policy we must have, however, and this year's congressional elections are shaping into a battle between the supply-side theorists and the anti-supply-side theorists. Wills will be winning the fiscal shots for
He will have some powerful support for his arguments when he does. The dramatic drop in the inflation rate caused an immediate 8 percent increase in the purchasing power of people on fixed incomes—retirees, for example. Even now, the nation's savings rate is at 6.3 percent and is rising for the first time in a decade. There are many industries, the Commerce Department's Index of Leading Economic Indicators increased in April for the first time in a year.
Against all of this, the Democrats seem to have nothing to offer but higher taxes and the frantic printing of money. While we are not (thankfully) a nation of economists, there appears to exist in America a grass-roots recognition that the immediate inauguration of Ted Kennedy isn't
go to do much for our economic health. And as they have so clearly demonstrated over the past several months, the House of Representatives good or bad anything for our economic health, good or bad
The president's situation can only improve over the summer. By July and August the economy will be feeling the full effects of the second recession, which is an opportunity the Democrats might have of convincing the American people of the need to cancel the third-year cut. It appears, alas, that Tip O'Neill's irrational attempts to turn the clock back to 1967 are doomed to failure.
Part of the fundamental nature of the Democratic Party appears to be the complete inability to deal with defeat in a presidential election. It seems that the House of Representatives, now under Democratic control, is convinced that the election of 1860 didn't really happen. The American people spoke, but the Democrats weren't listening.
The fundamental philosophical differences between the two parties are compounded in this case by the gross managerial incompetence the Democrats are demonstrating. It will be exceedingly difficult for them to present themselves as practicable alternatives to the supply-siders if they continue to publicly fumble the budget process.
President Reagan never promised an overnight return to prosperity. He did present the American people with a coherent, logical, long-term plan to return our economy and system of government to the real world. It would seem that the only argument the opposition can offer consists wholly of strident rhetoric and political bumbling. The choices are obvious.
The intellectual and practical bankruptcy of the Democratic Party is nowhere better illustrated than in California. In this year of supposed crisis, a choice is offered to the voters of that state in their Democratic candidate for the 11th district, a choice between Jerry Brown and Gore Vidal.
In one of the most politically important states in the Union, the Democratic Party can do no better than a moonbeam political creature with no evident firm convictions about anything and a mediocre novelist who seems to be running because he has nothing better to do. One wonders what visions this party has for the rest of the nation.
Education, employment seriously neglected
Reagan dooms U.S. economy. future
By ALVIN A. REID
Columnist
Over the past year and a half, what hasn't been said about Ronald Reagan and his infamous economic policies? Reagonomies haunts me like a spectre, and I feel like tearing my hair out by the roots every time I hear its chilling name. Unfortunately, Reagonomics will probably be part of the American vocabulary forever, complete with a definition in Webster's Dictionary.
No recent president has been watched as closely by the press and the American public, and Reagan, to his credit, has handled his presidential responsibilities with honesty and candor.
But the president is making some critical long-term mistakes that could wreck the future of this nation. By purposefully snubbing the public school system and letting the unemployment rate run wild, the Reagan administration is mortgaging the country's economic stability.
Reagan is, of course, facing strong opposition from the black community because many of his budgetary cutbacks mean minorities have to sacrifice to the point of nonexistence. Because so few African Americans are Reagan's political policy, it seems that the problem involves race. This is far from reality.
One of the most essential factors in the phenomenal economic growth of this country has been that its people have been well educated. Public education is more responsible for this amazing growth than any other type of learning, and it enables students to college students so drastically that only the very rich or needy will be able to attain higher education.
As a conservative, Reagan should understand that the backbone of this country is the American economy.
The battle with Reagan isn't a race struggle, it's a class conflict. Reagan is an redneck hat, but he is a friend of the wealthy. He isn’t unaccented, stuffed shirt, but he is a very conservative man.
Public high schools flounder near collapse because they simply aren't receiving the funds needed to educate this country's youth. This is partly due to lack of government support and partly because citizens, ravaged by high interest and unemployment, keep rejecting tax levies.
After the Russians launched Sputnik in 1959, the Eisenhower administration almost immediately decided to make millions of dollars in aid available to college students, especially at the graduate level. The result is a well-educated nation with well-informed politicians and leaders. Now the president wants to trash all the good that was created.
It seems to be in fashion to laminate public schools these days, and, as a favor to wealthy political cronies. Reagan is going to aid the sorry children of his own parents by providing credit to parents who send their children to
private schools. This is less than 10 percent of the general public, so this shrewd move can only be interpreted as a pat on the back to the big wheels that it was time for Reagan to become president.
If you don't get a decent education, chances are you can't get a steady job, and the unemployment rate, which currently stands at a post World War II high, will be driven even higher. But your prospects are clear, a clear enough sign that anyone, even a president, should clearly see a ballooning menace.
It's time for Reagan to take action to combat the spiraling unemployment rate before the botch
One of the most important economic indicators considered by leading economists is the Gross National Product (GNP). With low employment, the GNP is low, the country isn't runnng at maximum capacity, and problem will arise. With a staggering unemployment rate, it'll more than 9 percent, the country's growth is in doubt, and curaure America's sick economy will be futile.
The Reagan administration repeatedly says that the key to the success of Reaganomics is giving the program time to work, but time has run out. It will be interesting to see when Reagan decides to drop his tough-guy facade and abandon his ridiculous thinking on the education and employment fronts. In this election year, Reagan must decide whether to tangle with the big-money influence that sent him to the dark side of the poor and minorities or to continue adding fat to the fire by proposing another set of ludicrous cutbacks.
If something isn't done about unemployment, and soon, some very ugly situations could arise. An unemployment rate of 9.5 percent means a 13 percent rate or higher for blacks and a rate so high for black teenagers that it isn't kept by the unemployment bureau. Couple these figures with the fact that Black Americans, and throw in the summer heat, and you have a very explosive formula brewing.
hopefully, Ronnie and his ranch hands will come to their senses and devote some governmental attention to public education and unemployment and forget his beliefs opposing the military occupation. It is likely his countrymen to sacrifice, so now it is time that this country asked Reagan to sacrifice.
Better energy outlook results from reliance on free market
Reagan can continue with deaf ears now, but when it's time to make emergency legislation to keep the top on the powder keg it will already be too late.
By DANNY J. Boggs
N. Y. Times
WASHINGTON - In early 1981, U.S. energy policy changed markedly. Reliability on manipulation of prices and government regulation was replaced by an emphasis on market response as the best avenue to stable energy supplies, free of undue dependence on foreign sources of petroleum. As a result of these policies, perhaps the only Washington figures more pitiful than the energy lawyers, unemployed in droves, are the energy journalists, self-employed in crises and other real-world events rather than reporting administrative shadow-boxing with the ever-elusive "crisis."
10 get a real feeling for the remarkable change in our energy situation, we must look at the statistics for the first year of the Rugaean administration, which have now become available.
—The United States' oil net imports fell to 5.1 million barrels per day, less than one-third of the total consumption. This was down more than one-fifth since 2012 and down 3.5 million barrels per day from 1977.
Total consumption of oil products also fell by more than one million barrels per day.
—Oil production outside of Alaska began to increase for the first time in a decade, as the number of oil wells drilled increased 40 percent in one year and the number of operating drilling
rigs increased by more than 1,000 after complete decontrol of oil prices.
- Our net imports of all forms of energy were less than 10 percent of our total use of energy, the
Since the president's decontrol decision.
despite the cries of some critics (Sen. Howard M. Metzenbaum of Ohio predicted $2 per gallon gasoline by the end of 1983, the price of all petroleum products has declined in real terms. The world price of oil is down almost 20 percent in real terms, largely because the United States
Finally, this administration has made enormous advances in creating a strategic petroleum reserve that is truly a deterrent to interruptions in supply and would be highly useful in the event of shortages.
no longer is subsidizing petroleum imports and restraining petroleum production. Gasoline prices have fallen almost 20 cents per gallon, and oil company profits are generally declining. In other words, the industry is impossible without controls, but they are perfectly consistent with Reagan's energy policy.
In the four years before President Reagan's inauguration, barely 100 million barrels had been placed in storage. In less than a year, this amount was more than doubled, and the strategy petroleum reserve now contains more than 400 million barrels, more than 140 days of crude oil imports from Arab members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.
In an effort to deflate the obvious significance of these facts, several alarmist "explanations" have been given, primarily that these are simply the results of recession and higher prices caused by Reagan. That won't wash. Economic growth in 1981 was actually higher than was projected in the last predictions made by Jimmy Carter's predecessor, Ronald Reagan. The prices of petroleum products were lower. These two conditions should have worked to create more consumption and more imports, yet
imports in 1981 were actually 1.5 million barrels per day lower than projected, which saved Americans from sending some $20 billion overseas.
In short, these improvements in the energy situation must be attributed almost entirely to the individual efforts and initiatives of American producers and consumers. These improvements did not result from implementation of some government master plan. They were the outgrowth of an effort by Congress to provide visible ribbon cutting or regulatory mandates that could be identified as the explicit causes. In fact, this is not surprising; a bit of reflection will indicate that free decisions are almost invariably wiser than coerced ones, and the best decisions are made by those who feel their effects, not by bureaucrats issuing orders while employees work. This wisdom is the heart of the Reagan energy. As many facts rather than symbols, that policy is working.
This does not indicate that energy is no longer worth thinking about, either by citizens, or by the federal government. It does mean that concern is best expressed, and our energy situation can best be improved, by the actions of free Americans rather than by government programs and controls.
(DANNY J. BOGGS IS A SPECIAL
PRESIDENT FOR POLICY
DEVELOPMENT)