constituencies. Ford had been catapulted from
obscurity by Agnew’s resignation and the demise
of Nixon. Carter, former navy officer and, after the
death of his father, successful peanut farmer, had
risen to become governor of Georgia – a reforming
and successful governor. By a narrow margin,
Carter beat Ford and thereby ended eight years
of Republican power in the White House. But
the economic fortunes of the US had changed
since the last Democratic president, Johnson, had
launched his Great Society with the grand vision of
abolishing poverty in America. Carter did not have
an easy time before him.
Carter was the first president since the civil
war to come from the South. He was also a
Washington outsider, and owed his electoral
victory partly to this fact. The credibility of gov-
ernment had fallen, and the American people
were looking for a change from the old gang.
Ford was intelligent and his integrity was above
reproach, but the pardon he gave to Nixon had
damaged him badly, though seen in longer per-
spective it was both in the national interest and a
courageous step in the face of public feeling at
the time. Ford lacked charisma, though, and a
good tele-image. Carter also lacked a command-
ing presence, but his warm, folksy manner and
broad grin won him friends. He was patently
honest, untouched by sordid Washington politics
or past scandals. Even so, the margin of electoral
votes that carried him to the White House was
small; his strength in the south and north-east
carried the day, but he was weak in the west and
so lacked a broad national base of support.
Carter was determined to emphasise that his
presidency would represent a break with the past,
especially with Nixon’s ‘imperial presidency’. He
would be the people’s president, a trustee for
their needs, concerned with the wider national
interest. This implied not a weak presidency but
strong leadership, ‘doing what’s right, not what’s
political’. He saw himself as above party politics,
acting differently from Congress, whose senators
and representatives were actuated by political
considerations, having to bear in mind the special
interests of their constituents and their financial
backers, and having to keep a constant eye on re-
election. Although Carter had comfortable
majorities in both Houses, this did not mean
automatic support for all that he wished to
accomplish. He avoided any distinctive label: he
was liberal in some aspects of policy and conser-
vative in others.
After so much turmoil and change, Carter saw
a need for consolidation at home, efficiency and
honesty in government, a pruning of wasteful
welfare programmes, a reduction in government
interference and a lightening of the regulations
imposed on business and industry. American
politics do not neatly divide between one party
right of centre in its outlook and the other to the
liberal left of centre. Rather, the more conserva-
tive and the more liberal social policies cut
through each party. Trusteeship for Carter meant
a careful husbandry of the money demanded in
taxation. Sound government finance required the
balancing of the budget, not spending more than
the money in the coffers. Carter hoped to reduce
armaments and military expenditure. But he was
also sensitive to immediate needs, especially the
scourge of unemployment. To stimulate the
economy and reduce unemployment he adopted
a Keynesian approach, sending to Congress a
moderate tax-cutting bill and making federal
grants to create jobs. Congress changed the pro-
posals in detail but approved of the general thrust.
During the later years of his presidency, Carter
became more cautious, avoiding any costly reshap-
ing of welfare as he became more concerned about
inflation and a rising federal deficit. The 1970s,
after the shock of the oil-price rise of 1973–4,
were a difficult period of economic management
throughout the Western world, and of course
throughout the Third World. Governments are
lucky or unlucky when it comes to world eco-
nomic conditions and the business cycle, over
which they have very little control. But they get
the blame when unemployment rises and living
standards fall. Carter in 1978 fell back on the
old remedies of regulation, limiting the salary
increases of federal employees and setting volun-
tary – and ineffective – guidelines on wages and
prices. The classic remedy for inflation of raising
interest rates was also employed. There was a
coal strike and Carter invoked the anti-union