During the 1992 campaign, Bill Clinton repeatedly sought to distance himself from the liberal orthodoxy that had come to define the Democratic Party's national image. Labeling himself a "New Democrat," Clinton supported the death penalty, criticized racially incendiary remarks by black political activist Sister Souljah and promised to "end welfare as we know it." These pronouncements enabled Clinton to position himself as a moderate. In 1992, independent voters who had supported Republicans in previous elections returned to support the Democratic presidential candidate. As President, Clinton pledged to pursue "third way" policies that would synthesize the best of liberal and conservative ideas for the benefit of the nation. This volume, assessing the domestic policies of the Clinton administration, addresses two broad though closely related questions. First, was the New Democrat approach substantively significant or merely rhetorical? Second, did the policies themselves succeed in furthering the national interest? This collection features papers and commentaries initially presented at the 2005 Hofstra University Conference, "William Jefferson Clinton: The New Democrat' from Hope," in which dozens of top scholars, journalists and Clinton Administration officials evaluated the Clinton Administration's legacy. In this volume, political scientist Stephen K. Medvic and former White House senior staffer Elaine C. Kamarck examine the meaning of Clinton's New Democrat philosophy. Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin and economist Dean Baker offer commentary on economic policy. Clinton Trade Representative Mickey Kantor and Pepperdine University business law professor Larry Bumgardner offer evaluations of the administration's trade policies. Hofstra University information technology professor Laura Lally discusses the Clinton Administration's technology policy, and political scientist Robert J. Spitzer examines gun control policy.

Upon its enactment in July 1988, the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act (MCCA) was hailed as the first major expansion of government health care since the creation of Medicare in 1965. Supported by President Reagan, majorities in both houses of Congress, and the nation's largest senior-citizen interest group, the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), the legislation effectively plugged many of the holes in the existing Medicare system by providing protection against some but not all catastrophic health care expenses. Additionally, the consensus behind the MCCA appeared to establish a precedent for expanding social insurance in an era of high federal deficits. However, less than eighteen months later, the House and the Senate, responding to a tidal wave of criticism, would vote to repeal virtually all of the legislation.

Utilizing varied source materials, including interviews with policy makers and surveys of senior-citizen opinion gathered by the AARP, Richard Himelfarb undertakes a comprehensive analysis of how and why this unprecedented series of events transpired. In the process, he also examines the politics of federal entitlement programs in an era of high deficits and senior citizens' political influence, topics that are of particular interest in light of recent federal attempts to tackle health care reform.

Given the focus on foreign affairs and national security following 9/11, it is easy to overlook the domestic and economic legacies of the George W. Bush presidency. However, the articles in this volume argue that not only were these policies consequential to the nation, but in a number of instances they defied the conventional wisdom concerning the Bush White House. While Bush pursued ideologically conservative policies in some areas (e.g., Social Security, Supreme Court nominations and taxes), in others he did not (e.g., education, trade, government spending). Other examples include staffing (more competent and less ideological than one would expect) and press relations (relatively transparent). Taken together, these chapters will provoke second thoughts about Bush's domestic presidency as they argue that his policies frequently deviated from doctrinaire conservatism and changed the nation.