On Bill Clinton and History's Judgment

Robert Rector, senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, argues that Bill Clinton was right when it came to welfare reform.

As a conservative analyst who spent much of the 1990s working against most of Bill Clinton's agenda -- including even some aspects of his welfare reform proposals -- it pains me to say this.

Bill Clinton was right.

He deserves more credit for the passage of welfare reform than most conservatives probably care to admit.

No, Clinton didn't play a major role in shaping the policy details of the landmark 1996 act. But he understood something about policymaking that many conservative strategists and policy wonks could stand to re-learn: It isn't enough to get the technical details of a policy right. Words and symbols matter, too.

Indeed, thanks in large part to his effective use of words and symbols that challenged liberal orthodoxy on issues surrounding the poor, Bill Clinton not only helped "end welfare as we know it," but he helped end welfare as we know it before anyone even knew it.

Essentially Rector credits Clinton's rhetoric, his understanding of symbolism, and his vision. And while Rector argues that Clinton did not play a central policy role, it is useful to point out that in addition to rhetorical skills and vision, Clinton was undoubtedly the savviest politician of his generation and possibly the most policy-wonkish president in American history.

As the Monica Lewinsky fiasco fades from view it will be interesting to see what happens to Clinton's reputation among historians and political junkies. One of his potential weak points will have to be how he addressed the impending threat of terror, but no serious critic will be able to attack him for that without seriously considering the response to almost all of his foreign policy initiatives from an increasingly strident and isolationist Congress. Clinton will likely go down as a mixed bag, albeit as a two-term mixed bag, which usually redounds to the credit of the president. For a long time, President Clinton will remain a polarizing figure, but much like Reagan before him, who was equally polarizing in many ways, one can imagine that the passage of a generation will allow for more fair-minded assessments to present a full picture of Clinton's presidency, both its considerable foibles and its manifest strengths.