CBS News/ July 19, 2011, 11:26 AM

Reagan cited often in debt debate by -- Dems!

Ronald Reagan has come up many times during the ongoing debate over cutting the budget and raising the debt limit.

But the people bringing him up may be a bit surprising, reports CBS News Senior White House Correspondent Bill Plante.

It's been - Democrats who keep invoking the name of the conservative Republican hero.

Special Section: America's debt battle

Reagan's strong right-leaning stands didn't stop him from compromising with Democrats who controlled Congress, Plante observes. And that's why today's Democrats are pointing to him during the current debate.

President Obama has said, "Ronald Reagan worked with (then House Speaker) Tip O'Neill and Democrats to cut spending, raise revenues."

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D, Md.) has noted, "Ronald Reagan said that there were important times for compromise for the good of the country."

And White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has said, "Ronald Reagan successfully reached agreements with the Democratic speaker of the House."

The debt ceiling was raised 18 times during Reagan's eight years in office.

In 1983, he wrote the Republican Senate majority leader asking for an increase so the U.S. wouldn't "be forced to default on its obligations for the first time in its history."

Historian David Brinkley says it shows Reagan was a pragmatic conservative.

"He knew," says Brinkley, "we couldn't be perceived globally as reneging, because it very well might send the world economy spiraling in ugly directions. So, Reagan is the exact guy the Democrats should be quoting over the summer, and they're doing it."

But Reagan's last chief of staff, Ken Duberstein, says, not so fast.

"He would have said, 'Fight for the principle of no-new-taxes, if you're going to raise the debt limit. It's the responsible thing to do, but do it along with massive spending cuts, because the country needs it desperately in order to get our economy going."'

And yes, Reagan was willing to compromise, says Duberstein -- but President Obama hasn't built the consensus needed to do the same thing.

"The trouble," says Duberstein, "is (that), for the first two years, he didn't develop the levels of trust and confidence, and people would say, 'O.K. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt.' Nor has he sold to the American people as effectively as Ronald did."

© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
30 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
tsigili says:
Compromise used to be how things got done. Now, the fools in Washington don't compromise......on either side of the isle.

Partisan number one in Washington, is Obama himself. He will NOT meet anyone, half-way.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
AOCGUY says:
The more I think about this the more I believe the Congress is arguing over something they have already voted on. By virtue of approving a budget the Congress has approved spending at a set limit for all federal programs so they have already agreed to spending levels that clearly exceed federal revenues. It would seem to me that if Congress says to the US Government it is OK to spend x trillion dollars this year and revenues don't meet the approved spending levels then they have tacitly approved borrowing to meet those expenses. And since the national debt is the aggregate of all unpaid debt incurred over the livetime of this nation and all budgets up through and including the FY11 budget have been approved by Congress then this discussion over debt limit is just hot air and political posturing. Would be interested in hearing others thoughts on this.
reply
Zann-Zel replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Sad thing is most people aren't thinking it thru as you have. And the politicians are just using that ignorance to try to get people to "vote for their side"!
linkicon reporticon emailicon
nclaw441 says:
If the comparison is with Ronald Reagan, who compromised with Democrats in Congress, then the analogy is that President Obama should be looking to compromise with the Republicans in Congress.
reply
gbgentleman replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
He is trying to. He's offered 3 TRILLION in cuts in exchange for 1 TRILLION in new revenue (raised taxes and loophole cuts)
Mortarman429 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
What cuts?
See all 4 Replies
linkicon reporticon emailicon
rightbehind says:
Ronny raygun started a race to the bottom this country may not recover from. I apologize to our children. I voted for him. A decision I deeply regret. I was young and impressionable at the time.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
myopinionpal says:
The debt ceiling was raised 18 times during Reagan's eight years in office and when Obama tries to raise it one time all hell breaks loose.
reply
Mortarman429 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Because we cant addord to go any higher.
myopinionpal replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Mortarman429 you need to go back to school and learn how to spell afford.
See all 4 Replies
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bantamei says:
Reagan would probably be a Democrat today.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hsinco-2009 says:
I had contact with Ronnie Raygun and it sucked.

He was one big as shole.
reply
Mortarman429 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
So?
linkicon reporticon emailicon
snaptrap1-2009 says:
In 1981 this so called "Republican Hero" is the same greedy, wealthy human being that wanted a small package of restaurant catsup to be counted as vegetable on poor kids school lunch program... he wanted to cut one vegetable off of their lunch plate to cut the budget, while at the same time have thousands of dollars a plate lunches for fund raiser...he did cut federal taxes, but that forced the States to raise taxes to replace the ones he cut and more...Hero to whom? If this is what some call a hero, then we need a new term for real Hero's...i will give him credit for helping East Germany getting the Berlin wall torn down...
reply
Mortarman429 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Why is the Federal government involved in school lunches? The Consitution does authorize them doing so.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
ryanhn says:
Duberstein's contentions are bull. Obama and Democrats made a good faith effort attempting to build bipartisan support for every piece of legislation they passed, making major concessions along the way, including eliminating the public option for health insurance in the health care bill, only to have Republicans, the party of no, vote against the final result in every case. As far as selling to the American people, polls show at least in the current debate that the majority of the people side with the President with his balanced approach to handling the debt crisis and disapprove of the Republicans' approach on the issue.
reply
Mortarman429 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
They have made no such effort.
ryanhn replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
You. Mortarman, are either unobservant or have a highly selective memory.
See all 6 Replies
linkicon reporticon emailicon
askagain says:
Twenty-two years after leaving office and the Democrats are still fixated on President Reagan. He must have been a very effective president to be referred to so often by the Democrats.
reply
See all 30 Comments