Skip to main content

It's impossible to keep track of all of the falsehoods that circulate in the right-wing echo chamber, but when one threatens to escape that rarefied world and join the conventional wisdom, it's worth trying to stomp it.

The latest falsehood, and the stomping, below the jump.

The falsehood du jour is the idea that Republicans should dig in their heels when negotiating with Democrats, because when Ronald Reagan made a deal with Congressional Democrats back in the day, the Democrats reneged.

This has been a right-wing meme since at least the debt limit negotiations of last year; Here's Edwin Meese III, Reagan's attorney general, writing back in 2011:

The ratio in the final deal — the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) — was $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. . . . The tax increases were promptly enacted — Congress had no problem accepting that part of the deal — but the promised budget cuts never materialized.
See? Republicans can't trust Democrats to keep to their promises, so they shouldn't make any sort of deal with them that doesn't give them everything they want up front.

Although Meese's bare facts are true—there was a deal, and the cuts never materialized—Meese is still lying. And to get the real story, we don't even have to look outside the Reagan administration. Here's David Stockman, Reagan's budget director at the time, on what happened to the TEFRA spending cuts:

Of the spending cuts allegedly owed, $100 billion consisted in savings in debt service that Congress couldn't do anything about. $40 billion was management savings that we had promised to come up with, and hadn't; another $30 billion had actually been delivered in Medicare reimbursement reforms and other measures. Most of the remainder was the $50 billion in three-year defense cuts Howard Baker was proposing to cut again--and which [Secretary of defense Caspar] Weinberger was refusing to accept again.

—Stockman, The Triumph of Politics, p368-369.

So: only a small part of the spending cuts was under the Democratic Congress's direct control. And that part was the only part that was delivered. The rest was either not under anyone's control, or was lost in the miasma of the Reagan administration's dysfunction, described eloquently by Alexander Haig, another Reagan insider:
The [Reagan] White House was as mysterious as a ghost ship; you heard the creak of the rigging and the groan of the timbers and sometimes even glimpsed the crew on deck. But which of the crew had the helm?… It was impossible to know.…
The real lesson here is the opposite of what Republicans take from it; making concessions to them will never get concessions in return; they'll just make shit up to justify their own spectacular bad faith.

Crossposted on my blog at

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pgm 01, Chas 981, Blazehawkins, doug1204

    I wrote a book! Check out

    by Manfromporlock on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:31:18 PM PST

  •  This Canard Has Been Around For Years (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Usually you get Republicans that it is the Congress that has the purse strings. Bullshit. Budgets get signed by the executive and the budget season actually begins with the federal budget proposed by the President. All of Reagan's initial budget proposals had deficits that were huge.

  •  Manf - the take home message is that (0+ / 0-)

    spending cuts agreed to by either party are not enforceable beyond the current session of Congress. I am surprised that anyone believes that agreed upon spending cuts in future years are anything except fiction. If anyone was actually serious about spending cuts they would never have the tax increases come before the promised cuts. Instead they would have the tax increases staged over several years subject to actually meeting the spending limits.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:40:08 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site