Still others claim that neither Clinton nor Reagan is responsible for the economic prosperity of the last 10 years, but rather give credit to the Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. Some economist eagerly support Greenspan's " steady hand on interest-rate policies, knowing when to raise rates to keep the economy from overheating and when to cut rates to give a weakening economy a boost."" .
Despite all of this, the economy has plummeted over the past 6 months. We must now determine whether this downfall can be attributed to the economic policies of President Bush, or whether we are reaping consequences from the Clinton economy. There also lies the possibility that it is the result of some non-governmental action. In order to determine this, we must look at the following: the state of the economy at the time surrounding the enactment of President Bush's economic policies, the details of President Bush's economic plan and how it contrasts to those of President Clinton (most of which I have already outlined above), and outside factors affecting the US economy during this period. .
When President Bush took office in January 2001, he inherited record budget surpluses that had been created from record deficits during the Clinton Presidency. However, he also inherited the White House at a time when nervous consumers were spending less, layoffs were mounting, and the NASDAQ was down 20 percent since the previous Election Day. Based on these facts, some economists were already anticipating a steep decline in the economy before President Bush was announced the winner of the controversial Presidential election of 2001. This would lead us to believe that the downturn is a result of economic policies in place before President Bush took over; however, we must look at these economic policies in greater detail to be able to substantiate this.
As stated earlier, the foundation of President Bush's economic plan was the $1.
