ABSTRACT Economic Frames: Transitional Rhetoric under Clinton, Bush, and Obama Jeffrey A. Kurr, M.A. Thesis Chairperson: Martin J. Medhurst, Ph.D. During boom and bust periods, the dynamic status of the economy has become a perennial issue in the political arena. In this thesis, I engage in a rhetorical criticism analyzing how three presidents, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, rhetorically framed economic conditions to justify legislative solutions. I examine how each president prescribed policy solutions during his first months in office. In particular, I argue: Clinton constituted national identity around economic concerns to push his 1993 budget plan; Bush reinterpreted the nation-as-family metaphor to justify his 2001 tax cuts; and Obama injected crisis rhetoric into the American Dream to champion his 2009 stimulus. This analysis provides a foundation for understanding the econo-rhetorical leadership role of the president and the implications it has on framing congressional and public deliberation. Economic Frames: Transitional Rhetoric under Clinton, Bush, and Obama by Jeffrey A. Kurr, B.S.B.A. A Thesis Approved by the Department of Communication David W. Schlueter, Ph.D., Chairperson Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Baylor University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by the Thesis Committee Martin J. Medhurst, Ph.D., Chairperson Leslie A. Hahner, Ph.D. David K. Nichols, Ph.D. Accepted by the Graduate School May 2013 J. Larry Lyon, Ph.D., Dean Page bearing signatures is kept on file in the Graduate School. Copyright © 2013 by Jeffrey A. Kurr All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Focus of Thesis ........................................................................................................... 2 Prior Research on the Topic ........................................................................................ 4 Justification of the Study ............................................................................................ 6 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 8 Structure of the Thesis .............................................................................................. 10 CHAPTER TWO .............................................................................................................. 17 President Clinton’s Economic Program and Post-Cold War National Identity ............ 17 Constituting National Identity in the Presidency ...................................................... 21 The Post-Cold War Presidential Campaign .............................................................. 23 Transitioning to Clintonomics .................................................................................. 27 Transitioning to Economic National Identities ......................................................... 33 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 41 CHAPTER THREE .......................................................................................................... 50 President Bush’s Tax Relief and Rebalancing the Nation-as-Family Metaphor .......... 50 The Function of Family Metaphors .......................................................................... 53 The 2000 Presidential Campaign .............................................................................. 57 The Tax Family Reunion .......................................................................................... 64 Reconceptualizing Family ........................................................................................ 73 CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................. 82 President Obama’s Stimulus and the Perpetual Crisis of the American Dream ........... 82 Same v. Change ........................................................................................................ 87 Now v. Future ........................................................................................................... 91 Gloom v. Hope .......................................................................................................... 95 Divided v. Unified .................................................................................................... 99 Perpetuating Crisis in the Dialectical Pairs ............................................................. 103 CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................................ 112 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 112 The Evolution of Econo-Rhetorical Leadership ..................................................... 113 Limitations and Opportunities for Future Research ................................................ 120 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 125 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Conceptualizing, researching, and writing this thesis would not have been possible without the assistance and guidance of many different individuals. First, I would like to thank the chair of my thesis committee, Dr. Martin Medhurst. Over the past two years, your careful revisions and invaluable input enabled me to develop significantly as a young scholar exemplified in this project. Second, I would like to thank Dr. Leslie Hahner for taking the time to review my work and provide the enduring assistance to advance my writing potential. Third, I would like to thank Dr. David Nichols for providing the dialectic necessary for such an endeavor. I am grateful for all the time each of you took out of your busy schedule to enable me to complete this project. I would also like to thank the members of the Glenn R. Capp Debate Forum. The positive reinforcement and constructive feedback you provided helped me finish after an already long process. In particular, I would like to express deep gratitude to Dr. Scott Varda. You were willing to listen to any idea, be it debate or rhetoric, at any time, which I know had to be an enduring effort. Additionally, I would like to thank Alex McVey, Kyle Vint, and Heather Woods for always being willing to go over questions I had in mind or listening to me ramble about the latest musings on economic rhetoric. I would also like to thank all the debaters for continually checking on the progress of my writing, encouraging my efforts to finish, and offering any assistance they could. The entire debate team will always be my family in Waco for those reasons. v I also would like to thank a few colleagues of mine from the University of Pittsburgh, who never failed to answer phone calls or e-mail and always offered pointed advice. Thank you to Matthew Brigham, Taylor Hahn, Joseph Packer, and John Rief for encouraging me to apply to Baylor University, to study communication, and to never quit when I thought I was behind. Lastly, this endeavor would not have been possible without the enduring support of my family and friends. My parents and my brother always assisted me in any way possible even though they were thousands of miles away. Thank you all for being so helpful during this process. vi CHAPTER ONE Introduction During the 1992 presidential election, the Democratic Party made three simple words famous: “The economy, stupid.”1 This slogan was emblematic of Clinton’s strategy during his 1992 campaign: focus on the perceived failure of the president’s economic policies, and his broken 1988 campaign promise.2 After his inauguration, the president began pushing his new economic policy. On February 15, 1993, President Clinton addressed the nation regarding the economic program he was to propose two days later. The speech kicked off the president’s “campaign”-style tour to garner support for the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which set the basis for what would later be later known as “Clintonomics.” Over his eight years as president, the economy grew and the deficit shrank. However, the growth would not benefit Vice President Al Gore in the 2000 election due to the aftermath of the 1998 Lewinsky scandal.3 Governor George W. Bush tied character to economic policy by “personalizing” it relative to the vice president’s proposals.4 After the contested election where Gore won the popular vote and the Supreme Court had to intervene in the Florida ballot count, President Bush had to carefully orchestrate his early policy positions. On February 7, 2001, the president delivered a speech in support of his tax cut proposal that continued the “human touch” he had used in his campaign. Bush heavily involved his “tax families” in raising awareness over the benefits to the middle class from his tax cut. 1 Like Clinton, the economy grew substantially over President Bush’s first seven years in office. However, during the president’s final year in office, the largest economic collapse since the Great Depression in the 1930s dramatically shifted the focus of the 2008 election. After Senator Barack Obama beat Senator John McCain by tying the latter’s economic policies to the incumbent’s,