The seventies, p.44
The Seventies, page 44
97. Wandersee,On the Move,pp. 191–192.
98. Quoted in ibid., p. 176.
99. National Commission,What Women Want,p. 49.
100. Ibid., p. 60.
101. “White House Conference on the Family: A Schism Develops,”New York Times,January 7, 1980, p. D8.“Family Roster Attacked by Marchi,”New York Times,February 6, 1980.“Alabama Will Bypass the Conference on Families,”New York Times,February 12, 1980.
102.“Carter Opening Family Conference, Calls for Creative Solutions,”New York Times,June 6, 1980, p. B4.“2nd Day of Family Conference: Workshops and a Walkout,”New York Times,June 7, 1980. James J. Kilpatrick, quoted in White House Conference on Families,Listening to America’s Families: The Report(Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1980), p. 194.
103. “Second Parley on Families Opens Quietly,”New York Times,June 20, 1980. “Family Conference Ends in Agreement on 10 Goals,”New York Times,June 23, 1980.“Debate Shapes Up as Western Conference on Families Opens,”New York Times,July 11, 1980, p. A14.“After Heated Debates, Family Parley Ends Quietly,”New York Times,July 14, 1980.“Family Conference Rejects Antiabortion Amendment,”New York Times,June 22, 1980.
104. White House Conference,Listening to America’s Families.“A White House Report on Family Issues,”New York Times,October 23, 1980.
8.“The Minutemen Are Turning in Their Graves”1. Reagan’s predecessor as governor of California, Edmund “Pat” Brown, captured a broader assessment of Reaganism when he reflected, “I am chilled to the bone at the thought of Ronald Reagan one day becoming President of the United States.” See Edmund G. Brown,Reagan and Reality(New York: Praeger, 1970), p. 32.
2. Ernest Tubb, “It’s America: Love It or Leave It” (written by Jimmie Helms), MCA Records, 1984.
3. James E. McDavid, Jr., letter to President Nixon, February 5, 1970, quoted in Lassiter,“The Rise of the Suburban South” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia, 1999).
4. Richard Whalen,Taking Sides(New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1974), p. 100. The classic account of the right in the 1950s is Daniel Bell, ed.,The New American Right(New York: Criterion, 1955).
5. John Judis,Williom F. Buckley, Jr.: Patron Saint of the Conservatives(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988). George H. Nash,The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America Since 1945(New York: Basic Books, 1976).
6. John A. Andrew,The Other Side of the Sixties(New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1997). Mary C. Brennan,Turning Right in the Sixties(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995). Thomas Edsall with Mary Edsall,Chain Reaction(New York: Norton, 1992).
7. Alan Crawford,Thunder on the Right(New York: Pantheon, 1980), p. 5.
8. Richard A. Viguerie,The New Right(Falls Church, Va.: The Viguerie Co., 1981), pp. 78–98.
9. Nick Kotz, “King Midas of ‘The New Right,’”Atlantic Monthly(November 1978): 60. The New Right network is so tightly knit that “any diagram of its organization looks like an octopus trying to shake hands with itself, so completely interlocked are the directorates of its various components.” See L. J. Davis, “Conservatism in America,”Harper’s(October 1980): 21.
10. Paul Weyrich, quoted in Crawford, p. 3.
11. Viguerie,The New Right.
12. Kotz, “King Midas of ‘The New Right,’” p. 53.
13. Davis, “Conservatism in America,” p. 22. Kotz, “King Midas of ‘The New Right,’” pp. 52–58.
14. Richard Viguerie, quoted in Kotz, “King Midas of ‘The New Right,’” p. 60.
15. Donald Lukens, direct mail solicitation for Citizens for Life, and Howard Phillips, direct mail solicitation for the Conservative Caucus, reprinted in Crawford,Thunder on the Right,pp. 53–54.
16. Richard Viguerie, quoted in Kotz, “King Midas of ‘The New Right,’” p. 57.
17. Viguerie,The New Right,p. 66.
18. Jim Marshall, Fred Edwards, Charlie Daniels et al., “In America,” 1980.
19. Clinton Rossiter,Conservatism in America,(New York: Knopf 1962), p. 14.
20. Crawford,Thunder on the Right, pp. 165–180.
21. Spiro T. Agnew, address at Houston, Texas, May 22, 1970, inGreat Speeches of the Twentieth-Century(Santa Monica: Rhino Records, 1991), vol. 4, track 9.
22. The profamily movement, as its backers called it, identified a genuine tension in American culture. The late 1960s and early 1970s had ushered in new mores in family life, sexuality, and personal behavior. Feminism had unleashed massive changes in women’s roles, the structure of the family, and Americans’ understanding of femininity and masculinity. The gay rights movement had moved into the open the issues of civil rights and sexual freedom for homosexuals. The courts liberalized obscenity laws, and divorces became easier to obtain across the United States. The movie censorship system broke down, and the arts included much more explicit sexuality. Abortion became legal, the equal rights amendment was being considered for ratification, and schools were offering instruction in sex education. In short, a new code of personal behavior had emerged to challenge the older values of politeness, decency, and moral tradition. This new ethic encouraged the free expression of liberated individuals and challenged traditional notions of restraint. Civil rights now trumped civility. See Cmiel, “The Politics of Civility.”
23. Crawford,Thunder on the Right,pp. 155–159.
24. Ibid.
25. “Anita Bryant’s Crusade,”Newsweek,April 11, 1977, pp. 39–40. “Battle over Gay Rights,”Newsweek,June 6, 1977, pp. 16–22. “Miami Vote: Tide Turning Against Homosexuals?”U.S. News and World Report,June 20, 1977, p. 46.“Voting Against Gay Rights,”Time,May 22, 1978, pp. 21–22. “Why Tide Is Turning Against Homosexuals,”U.S. News and World Report,June 5, 1978, p. 29.New York Times,May 24, 1978. Doug Ireland,“Open Season on Gays,”Nation,September 15, 1979, pp. 207–210. “Law on Homosexuals Repealed in St. Paul,”New York Times,April 26, 1978. “Laws Aiding Homosexuals Face Opposition Around Nation,”New York Times,April 27, 1978.
26. David Nevin and Robert E. Bills,The Schools That Fear Built(Washington, D.C.: Acropolis Books, 1976). Thomas Byrne Edsall and Mary D. Edsall,Chain Reaction(New York: Norton, 1972), pp. 131–134. Lassiter, “Rise of the Suburban South.”
27. On pre-millenialism and politics, see Paul S. Boyer,When Time Shall Be No More( Cambridge: Harvard Unversity Press, 1992); and A. James Reichley,Religion in American Public Life(Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 1985).
28. Richard Viguerie, telephone interview withWashington Postreporter Thomas Edsall, January 17, 1990, quoted in Edsall and Edsall,Chain Reaction,p. 132.
29. Jerome Kurtz, telephone interview withWashington Postreporter Thomas Edsall, January-18, 1990, quoted in Edsall and Edsall,Chain Reaction,p. 132.
30. Edsall and Edsall, pp. 133–134. Frances FitzGerald,Cities on a Hill(New York: Touchstone, 1987), pp. 121–122.
31. “Political Science,” written and performed by Randy Newman, 1972.
32. Like the hard-line anticommunists, neoconservatives understood the dangers of communism and the need to contain it. They favored a big military and an interventionist foreign policy, but they also welcomed negotiations with the Soviets and a policy of flexible response to communist aggression. On the neoconservatives, see Sidney Blumenthal,The Rise of the Conter-Establishment(New York: Harper & Row, 1986); Peter Steinfels,The Neoconservatives,(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979); and Irving Kristol,Reflections of a Neoconservative(New York: Basic, 1983).
33. On Reagan as “premature” neoconservative, see Sidney Blumenthal,The Rise of the Counter-Establishment,pp. 249–250.
34. Clarence Y. H. Lo,Small Property Versus Big Government(Berkeley: University of California-Press, 1990), pp. 112–115. David Koistenen, “Resentment Against Government and Taxes and the Rightward Shift in American Politics” (unpublished manuscript, 1996), pp. 5–6.
35. Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 506.
36. Robert Kuttner,Revolt of the Haves(New York: Simon & Schuster, 1980), pp. 31–33. Alvin Rabushka and Pauline Ryan,The Tax Revolt(Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1982), pp. 15–16.
37. Bumper sticker from 1967, quoted in Kuttner,Revolt of the Haves,pp. 31, 35.
38. The strike did not get far. Any participation did not amount to more than the usual level of tax delinquency. See Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 7.
39.“Why the State Budget Keeps on Growing,”California Journal(January 1976): 32. See also Rabushka and Ryan,Tax Revolt,pp. 17–18, Kuttner,Revolt of the Haves,pp. 36–39; and Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 8.
40.California Homeowner(April 1964): 3, (February 1964): 4–5, quoted in Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 14.
41.“Property Tax Fighter Exerts Political Muscle,”Los Angeles Times,June 7, 1970. On Jarvis’s efforts to create an independent Conservative party, see “Jarvis—Tax Fighter Is Now Fighting for Votes,”Los Angeles Times,March 17, 1977.
42. Even in national politics, tax reform maintained a progressive cast. See Bruce J. Schulman, “Slouching Toward the Supply Side: Jimmy Carter and the New American Political Economy,”in The Carter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post–New Deal Era(Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1998), pp. 51–71.
43. Rabushka and Ryan,Tax Revolt, p. 185.
44. Howard Farmer, letters to the editor,Los Angeles Valley News,July 20, 1976, Sec. 2, p. 2, and September 8, 1976, Sec. 2, p. 2.
45. “Jarvis—Tax Fighter Is Now Fighting for Votes,”Los Angeles Times,March 17, 1977.
46.Taxpayer’s Watchdog(January 1977), quoted in Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 22.
47. Pamela Fulmer, letter to Governor Brown, June 8, 1978, quoted in Koistenen, “ Resentment,” p. 27.
48. Alan Brinkley, “Reagan’s Revenge, As Invented by Howard Jarvis,”New York Times Magazine,June 19, 1994, pp. 36–37. Koistenen, “Resentment.“
49. Brinkley, “Reagan’s Revenge,” p. 36. See also Howard Jarvis,I’m Mad as Hell(New York: Times Books, 1979).
50. Rochelle L. Stanfield, “The Taxpayers’ Revolt Is Alive or Dead in the Water—Take Your Pick,”National Journal,December 10, 1983, pp. 2568–2571. On public attitudes toward services and taxes during the late 1970s and early 1980s, see David O. Sears and Jack Citrin,Tax Revolt: Something for Nothing in California(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983).
51. Donna Turner to Brown, August 23, 1976, Brown papers d-14-5, quoted in Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 28. See also “Anatomy of the Tax Revolution,”National Review,July 7, 1978, p. 819; and Kaufman and Rosen,Property Tax Revolt,pp. 4–5, 35. To be sure, inflation not only raised property tax bills but simultaneously diminished the real cost of those tax payments, since the larger taxes were worth less in real dollars. Still, even with an inflation rate of 10 or 11 percent (and equivalent increases in nominal wages) in the late 1970s, this discount effect nowhere approached the 100 to 300 percent increases in property values. Real property tax increases were lower than the nominal tax increases, but both were significant.
52. Kuttner,Revolt of the Haves,pp. 22–23.
53. Jeremy Main, “The Tax Revolt Takes Hold,”Money(February 1980): 49–54.
54. Daniel A. Smith,Tax Crusaders and the Politics of Direct Democracy(New York: Routledge, 1988), p. 27. “Anatomy of the Tax Revolution,”National Review,July 7, 1978, p. 819. Koistenen, “Resentment,” pp. 9–10. Smith, p. 27.
55. Rabushka and Ryan,Tax Revolt, p. 25.
56. Jack Citrin and Frank Levy, “From 13 to 4 and Beyond: The Political Meaning of the Ongoing Tax Revolt in California,” in George G. Kaufman and Kenneth T. Rosen, eds.,The Property Tax Revolt(Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1981), pp. 1–2. Rabushka and Ryan,The Tax Revolt,p. 1.
57. Citrin and Levy, “From 13 to 4 and Beyond,” p. 9.
58. Lo,Small Property Versus Big Government.Koistenen, “Resentment,” p. 12. Still, the California tax revolt hardly constituted a mass movement. Supporters of Proposition 13 hired professional signature gatherers to qualify the measure for the ballot. Business, especially real estate and small business, played a heavy role. The Los Angeles Apartment Owners Association was Jarvis’s organizational and financial base. On the role of business in financing the tax revolt, see Daniel A. Smith,Tax Crusaders and the Politics of Direct Democracy,pp. 71–80, passim.
59.Proposition 13: Its Impact on the Nation’s Economy, Federal Revenues, and Federal Expenditures(Washington, D.C.: Congressional Budget Office, 1978).
60. “California Tax Revolt: Lesson for Legislators,”New York Times, June 12, 1978, p. B4. Milton Friedman, “The Message from California,”Newsweek, June 19, 1978, p. 26.
61. Citrin and Levy, “From 13 to 4 and Beyond,” p. 2. “Anatomy of the Tax Revolution,”National Review,July 7, 1978, p. 818.
62. Citrin and Levy, “From 13 to 4 and Beyond,” p. 2. Meanwhile, in whatNational Reviewproudly proclaimed “sons of Proposition 13,” Idaho and Nevada followed California with laws limiting property taxes to 1 percent of assessed valuation. Kansas, Maryland, Indiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Vermont lowered income taxes. Minnesota enacted a new tax law, slashing revenues by $712 million a year. Virginia, Kentucky, and New Mexico froze the amount that could be collected through property taxes. Arkansas, Louisiana, New Jersey, Virginia, West Virginia, and Ohio offered more modest property tax relief. Arizona, Hawaii, Michigan, Texas, and Utah fixed spending limits. See also “Sons of Proposition 13,”National Review,July 20, 1979, p. 903; and “The Tax Revolt—A Year Later,”U.S. News and World Report,June 11, 1979, p. 24.
63. “The Tax Revolt Takes a New Turn,”Newsweek,September 24, 1979, p. 45. Jeremy Main, “The Tax Revolt Takes Hold,”Money(February 1980): 49–54. Rabushka and Ryan,The Tax Revolt,p. 189. Some states—like Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, and Wisconsin—enacted truly massive cuts. Others indexed their tax rates to prevent inflation-induced bracket creep.
64. Massachusetts also relied overwhelmingly on the property tax to finance local government, and property tax rates in the cities, where per capita property values were lower, were astonishingly high.
65. Sherry Tvedt Davis, “A Brief Proposition of Proposition 2 1/2,” in Lawrence E. Susskind, ed.,Proposition 2 1/2: Its Impact on Massachusetts(Cambridge, Mass.: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, 1983), p. 6.
66. Smith,Tax Crusaders and the Politics of Direct Democracy, p. 102.
67. “Proposition 13 Paved the Way for Tax Revolts Across U.S.,”Los Angeles Times,February 14, 1988, p. 1.
68. Don Feder, quoted in Smith,Tax Crusaders,p. 104, n.84.
69. Smith,Tax Crusaders,p. 105.
70. Ibid., pp. 90, 110–124.
71. Davis, “A Brief Proposition of Proposition 2 1/2,” pp. 3–4.
72. Smith,Tax Crusaders,p. 28.
73. “Taxpayer Revolt: Where It’s Spreading Now,”U.S. News and World Report,June 26, 1978, p. 16.
74. Ibid., pp. 16–17.
75. California further relieved the fiscal stress of Proposition 13 with “Bailout II” in July 1979. The aid package parceled out almost $10 billion more over the next two fiscal years. The impact of the tax revolt on services and public life is assessed in Chapter 9 below. See also Rabushka and Ryan,The Tax Revolt;Kuttner,Revolt of the Haves;Kaufman and Rosen,The Property Tax Revolt;and Terry Schwadron, ed.,California and the American Tax Revolt(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).
76. “The Legacy of a Tax Cut,”Newsweek,January 12, 1982, p. 30. See also Chapter 9 below.
77. John A. Davenport, “Voting for Capitalism,”Fortune,July 17, 1978, pp. 46–48.Fortune’s cheerleading for capitalism contained much wishful thinking. Despite their aversion to government waste, Americans in the late 1970s still maintained a healthy appetite for services and a skepticism about tax reduction. But the tide had turned. Business and the wealthy were no longer the enemies, equity no longer the issue. Despite President Carter’s call for an increase in the capital gains tax, a levy focused on the affluent, public sentiment instead rallied behind the proposal ofWisconsin congressman William Steiger to lower that tax.
