Read my lips: no new taxes

Bush delivering the famous line at the 1988 convention

"Read my lips: No new taxes" was a famous pledge made by Republican Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush at the 1988 Republican convention in his acceptance speech on August 18. The line was written by speech writer Peggy Noonan, and was one of the most prominent sound bites from the speech.

The impact of the pledge was considerable, and helped Bush win the 1988 United States presidential election. Once president, a declining economy and the need to compromise with the Democrat controlled Congress forced Bush to agree to raise taxes in 1990. This reversal caused great controversy, especially among the more conservative wing of the Republican Party. In the 1992 presidential election campaign, Pat Buchanan made extensive use of the phrase in his surprising challenge to Bush in the Republican primaries. In the election itself, Bill Clinton also made use of the quote as evidence of Bush's perfidy.

Vice President Bush and taxes

Ronald Reagan's policy was that tax increases were undesirable but sometimes necessary. Over the course of his time in office, Reagan approved thirteen tax hikes, including one of the largest in history in 1982, while also cutting taxes on a number of occasions. As his vice president, Bush endorsed these policies. In 1984 there was some controversy when Bush seemed to diverge somewhat from Reagan's view. Responding to Walter Mondale's admission that if he were elected taxes would likely be raised, Bush implied that tax increases might be necessary in the next four years. Reagan asserted that he had no plans to raise taxes in his second term, and Bush quickly argued that he had been misunderstood. Bush's statements led some conservative to begin doubting Bush's dedication to tax cuts. ^[1]

As the competition to succeed Reagan began in 1986, it was clear that taxes would be a central issue. Grover Norquist, head of and Americans for Tax Reform, had created a no-new-taxes pledge and was encouraging Republican candidates to sign it. A large number of congressional candidates signed, as did Bush's primary rivals Jack Kemp and Pete du Pont. Bush at first refused to sign the pledge, but in 1987 eventually acquiesced. The Bush campaign would later join other candidates in using the tax issue to attack Bob Dole, who had not been clear on the subject.^[2] The exact phrase "Read my lips: No new taxes" was used first in the New Hampshire primary, and throughout the primary Bush's pledge not to raise taxes was a consistent if not central issue.

The pledge

Bush had firmly secured the nomination by the time of the convention, but his advisors still worried about the lack of enthusiasm for Bush in the conservative wing of the Republican Party. Taxes were one issued, which in the words of Bush advisor James Pinkerton, "unified the right and didn't antagonize anybody else."^[3] Thus a firm no-new-tax pledge was included in Bush's acceptance speech at the New Orleans convention. The full section of the speech on tax policy was

I'm the one who will not raise taxes. My opponent says he'll raise them as a last resort, or a third resort. But when a politician talks like that, you know that's one resort he'll be checking into. My opponent won't rule out raising taxes. But I will. And The Congress will push me to raise taxes and I'll say no. And they'll push, and I'll say no, and they'll push again, and all I can say to them is "Read my lips: No new taxes."

The passage was written by leading speechwriter Peggy Noonan, with Jack Kemp having suggested the basic idea.^[4] Including the line caused some controversy, as some Bush advisors felt the language was too strong. The most prominent critic was economic advisor Richard Darman, who crossed the phrase out on an initial draft calling it "stupid and dangerous."^[5] Darman was one of the main architects of Reagan's 1982 tax increase, and expected to have a major policy role in the Bush White House. He felt that such a pledge would handcuff the administration.^[6] Upon the advice of others, especially Roger Ailes, it was, however, included in the speech. It was felt the pledge was needed to keep conservative support in a campaign that was trying to be very centrist. It was also hoped it would add an element of toughness to a candidate who was suffering from a perception of being weak and vacillating. At the time Bush was significantly behind Dukakis in the polls, and Darman has argued that the campaign was far more concerned with winning than governing.^[7] The phrase, delivered with seemingly great conviction and passion by Bush, became one of the most prominent sound bites played in the media after the speech, as was intended by Noonan.

Taxes raised

When in office Bush found it very hard to keep his promise. The Bush campaign's figures had been based on the idea that the high growth of the late 1980s would continue throughout his time in office.^[8] By 1990 rising deficits, fueled by a growth in mandatory spending and a declining economy, began to greatly increase the federal deficit. The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act mandated that the deficit be reduced, or else mandatory cuts unpalatable to both Republicans and Democrats would be made. Reducing this deficit was a difficult task. The obvious government waste and easy spending cuts had already been made during the eight years of the Reagan administration. New cuts of any substance would have to come either from entitlement programs, such as Medicare or social security, or from defense.^[9] The Democrats, who controlled Congress, refused to agree to any massive spending cuts without tax increases.

Despite these problems the budget for the 1989 fiscal year was passed with relative ease, largely as the White House team and Dan Rostenkowski, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, agreed to postpone talk of both deep cuts and tax increases until the next year.

File:May 1990 budget meeting.jpg

A May 12, 1990, budget meeting between the president and congressional leaders.

The budget for the fiscal year 1990 proved far more difficult. Bush initially presented congress a proposed budget containing steep spending cuts and no new taxes, but Congressional Democrats dismissed this out of hand. Negotiations began, but it was clear little progress could be made without a compromise on taxes. Richard Darman, who had been appointed head of the Office of Management and Budget, and Chief of Staff John Sununu both felt such a compromise was necessary. Other prominent Republicans had also come out in favor of a tax increase, including Gerald Ford, Paul O'Neill, and Lamar Alexander.^[10]

At the end of June, Bush released a statement stating that "it is clear to me that both the size of the deficit problem and the need for a package that can be enacted require all of the following: entitlement and mandatory program reform, tax revenue increases, growth incentives, discretionary spending reductions, orderly reductions in defense expenditures, and budget process reform." The key element being the reference to "tax revenue increases" now being up for negotiation. The release caused an immediate furor. The headline of the New York Post the next day read "Read my Lips: I Lied." Initially some Republicans argued that "tax revenue increases" did not necessarily mean tax increases, but Bush soon confirmed that tax increases were on the table.^[11]

Some of the most enraged over the change in policy were other Republicans, including Newt Gingrich, the Senate leadership, and Vice President Dan Quayle. They felt Bush had destroyed the Republican's most potent election plank for years to come. When Sununu called Gingrich with the news, he hung up on him in anger. That the Republican leadership was not consulted before Bush made the deal also angered them. This quickly led to a bitter feud within the Republican Party. When Senator Trent Lott questioned the reversal, Sununu told the press that "Trent Lott has become and insignificant figure in this process." Republican National Committee cochair Ed Rollins issued a memo instructing Republican congress members to distance themselves for the president if they wished to be reelected, and was fired at Bush's command.^[12]

Many also felt that, while perhaps necessary, the reneging was badly handled. Bush's statement on the issue was simply posted on the notice board in the pressroom. There was no attempt to sell or defend the reversal. It was also very sudden; there was no attempt to slowly convince the American people of the necessity of raising taxes. No figures with influence on the conservative base were recruited to endorse and try and sell the about-face.

Eventually taxes were raised in the new budget. In September Bush released a new budget proposal, backed by the congressional leadership, which notably included an immediate five-cent per gallon increase on the federal gasoline tax, and a phased increase of even higher fuel taxes in subsequent years. To the surprise of the Bush administration, this plan was rejected. Conservative Republicans, led by Gingrich, voted against it because of its tax increases, while liberal Democrats opposed it because the focus on excise taxes fell too heavily on the poor. Bush vetoed the continuing resolution, and thus on October 5 the federal government shut down. Three days later Bush agreed to a new resolution, and soon after the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 was finally passed. This new proposal replaced some of the fuel taxes with a 10% surtax on the top income tax bracket (thus raising the top marginal tax rate to 30.8%) and also included new excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco products, automobiles and luxury yachts.

These events were a severe blow to Bush's popularity. From the historic high of 79% early in his term, Bush's approval rating had fallen to 56% by mid-October 1990.^[13] In 1990, the American Dialect Society selected Bushlips — meaning an insincere political remark — as its Word of the Year. This was a blow to Republicans generally, who lost ground in both the House and Senate in the 1990 midterm elections. Soon after, however, the events of the Gulf War pushed such issues out of the news, and Bush's approval rating rose to even higher levels.

1992 election

The phrase was occasionally used by the Democrats running for their party's nomination, but it was first widely used by Pat Buchanan during his primary battle against Bush. Buchanan stated that Bush's reversal was one of his main reasons for challenging Bush. On the day he entered the race, he said it was "because we Republicans, can no longer say it is all the liberals' fault. It was not some liberal Democrat who said 'Read my lips: no new taxes,' then broke his word to cut a seedy backroom budget deal with the big spenders on capital hill."^[14] Buchanan subsequently made extensive use of the 1988 quote in his New Hampshire campaign, repeating it constantly in both television and radio commercials. Buchanan won a surprising 40% of the vote in New Hampshire, a major rebuff to the President.

The early response by Bush was that raising taxes had been essential due to the condition of the economy. Polling showed that most Americans agreed some tax increases were necessary, but that the greater obstacle was the loss of trust and respect for Bush. When the primary campaign moved to Georgia, and Buchanan remained a threat, Bush changed strategies and began apologizing for raising taxes. He stated that "I did it, and I regret it and I regret it"^[15] and told the American people that if he could go back he would not raise taxes again. This also proved ineffective, and the broken pledge dogged Bush for the entirety of the 1992 campaign.

Democratic candidate Bill Clinton, who did not object to tax hikes, also managed to use the broken pledge to great effect late in the campaign. In October 1992 a television commercial, designed by campaign manager James Carville, had Bush repeating the phrase to illustrate Bush's perfidious nature. It was regarded one of the most effective of all of Clinton's campaign ads. The tax reversal played a central role in reducing the public's opinion of Bush's character. Despite the variety of scandals that affected Clinton during the election, polls showed the public viewed Clinton and Bush as similar in integrity.^[16]

The broken promise was only one of the factors leading to Bush's defeat, but it was an important one. Republican pollster Richard Wirthlin called them "the six most destructive words in the history of presidential politics."^[17] Ed Rollins has called it "probably the most serious violation of any political pledge anybody has ever made."^[18] Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater called the reversal the "single biggest mistake of the administration."^[19] Others disagree with this view. Richard Darman does not believe that the reversal played a central role in Bush's defeat; rather he argues that it simply became a focal point for discontent an economic situation that Bush had little control over.^[20] Other Republicans feel that the reversal was politically disastrous, but also good for the country. Daniel L. Ostrander has argued that Bush's actions should be seen as a noble sacrifice of his own political future for the good of the nation's well-being.^[21]

While the reversal played an important role in Bill Clinton's 1992 victory, it also played a role in the 1994 Republican congressional victory. Newt Gingrich, while a member of the congressional negotiating committee, refused to endorse Bush's compromise on the tax issue. He then led over hundred Republican House members in to voting against the president's first budget proposal. This made Gingrich a hero to conservative Republicans, and propelled him into the leadership role he would play in the "Republican Revolution" of 1994. ^[22]

Use in culture

The phrase was also used as a sound bite in the song "Foreclosure of a Dream" by Megadeth, off their 1992 album Countdown To Extinction. The song deals with bassist David Ellefson's family, who were farmers in Minnesota, being put out of business during the Reagan administration. [23] Another song to use the phrase as a sound bite is "Choices" by Mudvayne, off their 2005 album Lost and Found. The song is essentially antipolitical, calling leaders irresponsible. The sound bite can be heard at approximately 7:34 and is amongst other sound bites that support the theme of the song.

Notes

^ Jack Germond. Mad as Hell. pg. 23
^ Germond pg. 24
^ Germond pg. 22
^ Peggy Noonan. What I Saw at the Revolution. pg. 307
^ John Robert Greene The Presidency of George Bush. pg. 37
^ Richard Darman. Who's in Control? pg. 192
^ Darman pg. 193
^ Peter B. Levy "No New Taxes." Encyclopedia of the Reagan-Bush Years. pg. 260
^ Darman pg. 198
^ Darman pg. 200
^ Germond pg. 34
^ Greene pg. 84-88
^ Germond pg. 45
^ Quoted in the New York Times December 11, 1991 pg. B12
^ The apology first ran in the Atlanta-Journal Constitution
^ Honor and Loyalty: Inside the Politics of the George H. W. Bush White House pg. 374
^ MacKenzie, Colin. "How Bush Blew It." The Globe and Mail November 4, 1992 pg. A1
^ Germond pg. 35
^ Ryan J. Barilleaux and & Mark J. Rozell. Power and Prudence. pg. 34
^ Darman pg. 286
^ Richard Himelfarb and Rosanna Perotti. Principle over Politics? pg. 56
^ Himelfarb and Perotti. pg. 53.

References

Barilleaux, Ryan J. and & Mark J. Rozell. Power and Prudence: The Presidency of George H.W. Bush. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2004.
Darman, Richard. Who's in Control?: Polar Politics and the Sensible Center. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996.
Germond, Jack. Mad as Hell: Revolt at the Ballot Box, 1992. New York: Warner Books, 1993.
Greene, John Robert. The Presidency of George Bush. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2000.
Himelfarb, Richard and Rosanna Perotti. eds. Principle over Politics?: The Domestic Policy of the George H. W. Bush Presidency. Westport: Praeger, 2004.
Levy, Peter B. "No New Taxes." Encyclopedia of the Reagan-Bush Years. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996.

External links