I’ve restrained myself on countless occasions over the last week on Reagan-related myths — it could easily become a full-time job — but one caught my eye over the weekend that deserves to be debunked.
As Atrios noted the other day, Tim Russert was on with Larry King last week when the Meet the Press host offered this obvious falsehood:
“The Republicans achieved control of the United States Congress for the first time in 70 years, of both houses, under Ronald Reagan.”
As a factual matter, this is just wrong. The Democrats maintained a House majority throughout Reagan’s presidency. The GOP controlled the Senate for part of Reagan’s term, but Dems wrestled the majority back while Reagan was still in the White House. Russert should know better than to make such an obvious mistake on national television.
Alas, it’s not just Russert. There seems to be an impression that Reagan not only helped the GOP dominate the 1980s, but that Reagan’s enduring (and alleged) popularity has shaped GOP majorities in Washington today. Roll Call’s RJ Matson, for example, had a political cartoon last week that emphasized this point — it showed the GOP elephant with the White House and both chambers of Congress above the caption, “The Reagan Legacy.”
Let’s set the record straight. In 1982, Reagan’s first midterm election, Dems gained 26 seats in the House, expanding their already large majority. In 1986, Reagan’s other midterm test, the GOP lost eight Senate seats, after losing two in 1984, as Dems regained the majority. If Reagan’s allegedly historic popularity was helping the Republican Party nationwide, no one seemed to remind the voters about it.
Indeed, in 1994, Dems lost eight Senate seats. At the time, it was viewed as a GOP “revolution” and a wholesale repudiation of Bill Clinton’s presidency. But in 1986, Reagan’s GOP lost the exact same number. Was it a Dem revolution and a repudiation of Reagan?
Likewise, in 1992, Clinton beat Reagan’s VP in a landslide. At that point, just four years after Reagan left office, Democrats controlled the White House, the Senate, the House, and a majority of the nation’s governorships. Was this part of Reagan’s historic and enduring popularity? Probably not, so why would the partisan make up of Washington 12 years later be credited to Reagan? In short, it shouldn’t.
And let’s not forget, in the four presidential elections since Reagan left office, the Dem candidate has received more votes than the Republican candidate in three of them — including three straight in 1992, 1996, and 2000. It is the first time Dems have achieved this since the 1940s. It hardly suggests a lasting political “legacy” for Reagan.