Talk:Reagan Administration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Iran-Contra
Did Reagan say he was unaware of the entire Iran-Contra fiasco, or just the funding of the Contras? Trey Stone 01:04, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- He said he was unaware that some of the proceeds of the sale were being diverted to funding the Contras (whether or not he actually was unaware is a matter for some dispute -- however, there has never been any conclusive evidence that he was informed). Reagan always admitted to being aware of (and giving authorization for) the broader initiative to free the hostages via arms sales. Neilc 01:55, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] AIDS
[edit] Generally
Changed the sentence in the header about the AIDS epidemic being ignored. The budget for AIDS research, treatment and prevention increased from $200,000 in FY 1981 (the last budget of the Carter administration), to more than $900 million in the Reagan administration's last budget (FY 1988, which closed on September 30, 1988). That can hardly be equated with "ignoring" the situation. Ellsworth 21:22, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Response to
Removed this sentence:
- His administration approached the epidemic as a series of local and state issues rather than with a national strategy, and politicians for the Department of Health and Human Services pleaded behind the scenes for adequate funding.
I would like to see this documented: as mentioned above, the AIDS research budget skyrocketed during the '80s and the CDC took the lead on the issue. Ellsworth 00:25, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
And also removed this sentence from para. about the Watkins commission:
- but its recommendations for increased funding went largely ignored by the Reagan and the subsequent Bush administration.
Incorrect: see the report below. Funding for AIDS research, prevention and treatment increased every year during both the Reagan and the G.H.W. Bush administrations. Ellsworth 21:49, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Source on funding data
Analysis of AIDS spending by Federal government (PDF document) Ellsworth
A couple of comments on this report: a) The report shows that AIDS funding doubled within 2 years after Reagan left office. b) Shouldn't funding be somewhat proportional to the number of AIDS cases, which ballooned even more under this administration? User: anon
- a) Agreed, but so what? AIDS funding increased by 25-fold in Reagan's first budget and by 5-fold in his second. (FY 82-83)
- b) Not sure what "this administration" means, but there's no magic "proportionality" in determining whether spending on a problem like this is necessary or desirable with respect to its numerical scope. Ellsworth 02:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Busted links
I dropped these links about when Reagan mentioned AIDS: one was a policy address and the other was a press conference.
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/resource/speeches/1985/91785c.htm http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/resource/speeches/1986/20686c.htm
I'll find the sources again one of these days....
Ellsworth 02:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Found one
This Sullivan blog entry contains an unsourced quote from September 1985 by Reagan on AIDS funding. It'll do until I can run down a source. Ellsworth 20:54, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Domestic Policy
I see the NPOV section dispute, and agree in part, but could someone cite specifics? In the mean time I will try and remove some of the more tendentious phrases. Ellsworth 01:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- I took out some weasel words about economic program. Ellsworth 16:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- The section seems fair enough now and not too many other users have chimed in. I have removed the dispute marker, if you disagree please comment. Ellsworth 22:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Administration pages
Why is it that some presidents have two pages about them, one for the person in general and one for just the administration. See Ronald Reagan and Reagan Administration. The administration pages seem redundant as the information is mostly the same on both pages. I have also posted this on the Ronald Reagan talk page.
- Grhs126student 21:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reagan Revolution
I came by this site searching for the term "reagan revolution", yet it is not defined in the text. Perhaps this should be added. 84.169.217.197 19:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What a really swell guy
This article reads as hagiography and/or propaganda. I question the bias of an article that portrays a highly controversial leader in an overwhelmingly positive light. Further, many items stated as fact seem to be clipped from campaign slogans, but are not supported by the record. ~~ Michael J Swassing 06:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)