The Presidency of Bill Clinton after Thirty Years: A Review Article

• Published in: Political science quarterly
• Main Author: Taylor, Mark Zachary
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 14-10-2024
• ISSN: 0032-3195; 1538-165X
• DOI: 10.1093/psquar/qqae106

Abstract Did Bill Clinton destroy the U.S. economy? In a recent book, Nelson Lichtenstein and Judith Stein offer a scathing new critique. In this account, Clinton not only ravaged the United States in his own time but is largely to blame for America's subsequent economic inequality, monopolistic corporations, the Great Financial Crisis, the rise of China, and the advent of Trumpism. And yet, the economic data speak well of the Clinton presidency. He fares poorly on the trade deficit and economic inequality but otherwise delivered a balanced economic boom, far better than most administrations of the past fifty years. How do we square the withering criticisms of Lichtenstein and Stein with Clinton's economic achievements? It is correct that globalization and technological change tend to hurt blue-collar workers. And because Clinton embraced these forces and sought to place the United States at their headwaters, he may, indeed, be a “fabulous failure” from Lichtenstein and Stein's perspective. But the authors, each a labor historian and advocate, willfully dismiss the benefits that the nation as a whole, including workers and their children, enjoyed under Clinton. They also ignore the financial and military crises that Clinton averted. Overall, the Clinton administration created a wealthier and more competitive economy, albeit at the expense of those workers most vulnerable and least able to change. That is, Clinton helped transform the U.S. economy, just not along the lines that Lichtenstein and Stein prefer.