President William Simon

Alright so I've been reading an account of the History of the United States from Ford on, and I've learned a little about Nixon and Ford's secretary of the Treasury. William Simon seems to have been a conservative budget of the most traditional fashion. He was also fourth in line to the Presidency before Nixon resigned, because the Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger was constitutionally ineligible. Now, before Ford became Vice President, if I'm remembering things correctly, the Speaker of the House clearly believed that it would be wrong of him to accept the Presidency should Nixon be forced out of office. After all, he was a Democrat, and the people had voted for a Republican in landslide numbers. Suppose that for whatever reason the Congress cannot accept anyone to replace Agnew in time, and Nixon is driven to resignation more or less on schedule. Carl Albert and James Eastland agree to resign the Presidency more or less immediately to make room for the next Republican in the line of succession, the Secretary of the Treasury, William Simon.

Just a couple things to keep in mind.

Simon supported both lower spending and higher taxes to thwart the inflationary cycle. He isn't going to accept, much less advocate for a tax cut. Conversely the Democratic Majority Congress is unlikely to accept such a program. How would that issue be resolved.

Simon was opposed, to the bitter end, to a NYC bail out. That means, with Simon in the White House, such a bail out might not happen.
 
"Simon to City: FU!"

Anyway, sounds like he could've done well. Not saying he'd be popular, I'd expect him to be an incredibly unpopular President due to both tax raises and spending cuts, thus pissing off both sides at the same time. Despite that, I can see him being judged in retrospect as one of the nation's greater Presidents due to, theoretically, whipping inflation and being a true fiscal conservative. Given where we are now, he could be judged very well. (not that I'm necessarily a supporter of tax raises)
 
Keep in mind, the President cannot unilaterally decide fiscal policy. As I said, the Democratic Majority Congress is not going to support Simon's policies. Indeed, the liberals in Congress supported the opposite approach to Simon's, believing that unemployment was the bigger issue. They wanted both lower taxes and more spending. Simon might be able to lower spending, but there's no way he's raising taxes. A massive amount of vetoes is to be expected. Also, in the short term, the economy might be worse, higher unemployment etc. That means there is no way Simon wins reelection. But the impact may be felt later. If Simon simply creates the 1982 recession years earlier, and thereafter succeeds in defeating inflation, you might see a recovery in the 1970's, although the oil issue could hamper that. Imagine a 1984 like economy four years earlier. That might mean the overall impact of a Simon Presidency is a two term Democratic Presidency between 1977-1985.

I doubt Simon would be well regarded. After all, Ford has basically been forgotten, and Carter's reputation is never going to escape the bad economic climate he governed under. Basically Simon is an accidental President, who if he is remembered at all, is remembered for the bad economy he fostered. Paul Volcker, and by extension, Jimmy Carter, did not receive credit for the economic recovery in the 1980's. So the fruits of Simon's efforts are likely to be credited to his successor.
 
Top