Essay on Federal Bureaucracy Reforms
Print Essay 
When Presidents are inaugurated, they all have aspirations of what they want and how they wish their tenure to be like. Most of them announce their plans during inauguration such as providing employment to youths, reducing the taxes, but not all are able to fulfill their promises. President Reagan, President Carter and President Clinton are among the United States presidents who made efforts to reform the federal bureaucracy in America. Not all the reforms were a success as intended, but they made efforts to reform and cut the size of federal bureaucracy.
During his first inaugural address, President Reagan laid out his view on governing where he said that the Government was not the solution to peoples problems but the Government was the problem. He promised to cut taxes, balance the federal budget and curb government spending. Reagans economic program had two major components; budget cuts and tax reduction. Within weeks in office, Reagan implemented the marginal tax rates cut over the next three years by 30 percent, trimming the budget for the coming year y $41 billion. Not only did President Reagan cut the tax rates, but the Tax Reform Act of 1986 simplified the income tax code by doing away with the many tax shelters, reducing the tax brackets and the number of deductions. His era of economics was referred to as Reaganomics where there was implementation of tax cuts, deregulation as well as restrain in domestic spending which aided in fuel and rise in economy which lasted for two decades (Hood & Lodge, 2004). He had inherited an inflation and unemployment sum of 20 percent; misery index and by the time his term was over it had dropped to 9.72 percent. During his reign, new jobs were created adding up to 16 million.
When Jimmy Carter came into office, he struggled to respond to major challenges, such as major energy crisis as well as unemployment and high inflation. He proposed a net tax reduction consisting of $17 billion in net income tax cuts for individuals, across the board rate reductions and new personal credit focusing on low and middle income taxpayers. He also recommended the Congress to reform the tax system as well as provides $25 billion in net tax reductions for both businesses and individuals. Although not all his plans were a success, by the end of his administration, Carter claimed an increase of almost eight million jobs as well as decrease in the budget deficit which was measured in the percentage of the gross national product.
Clintons major goal was on overhauling U.S Federal Bureaucracy. In efforts to cut bureaucracy, President Clinton cut the federal bureaucracy by more than 100,000 positions. He also reduced the White House Staff by 25 percent. He ordered a substantial reduction in the federal workforce, year by year cutting in the administrative costs of each department. In the first weeks of his administration, he called the department heads to recite the economies they had achieved. During Clintons leadership, almost 6 million new jobs were created in the first two years in office. That was an average of 250,000 new jobs every month. As part of an economic plan, Clinton cut the taxes on 15 million low income families, making tax cuts available to 90 percent of small businesses and raising taxes on 1.2 percent of the wealthy taxpayers. He also signed into law the largest deficit reduction plan which resulted in over $600 billion in deficit reduction.
In conclusion, President Reagan, President Carter and President Clinton made major changes to correct and improve the economy of the United States. Although not all came to be, most of them were recognized as important. All the three did make efforts to cut taxes and reducing the budget to help the low income earners raise their living standards. The current President, President Obama is also in support to shrink the size of the federal government.
References
Nelson, M. (2010). The presidency and the political system. Washington, DC: CQ Press
Hood, C., & Lodge, M. (2004). Competency, bureaucracy, and public management reform: A comparative analysis. Governance, 17(3), 313-333.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SuperbGrade website, please click below to request its removal: