“ Reaganomics and the President's Men”

No economist lays the entire blame for the current recession at the doorstep of Reaganomics. But judged on its own terms, Mr. Reagan's allegedly painless means to economic recovery has failed to deliver on its promise of simultaneous low inflation, robust growth and a balanced budget.
How could the nation have gone from hope to gloom in less than two years? It is a critical question as the 1982 election approaches. Yet there is another, possibly more significant question to be asked: How could Mr.
Reagan's economic plan have been enacted in the first place? For it was a program that lacked any sort of traditional constituency in Congress or in the Government, a program whose premises were challenged by conservative and liberal economists alike and that was widely characterized as a risky gamble with the nation's future.
This question hovers over much of the current debate about Reaganomics, just as it hovered, unasked, over a somber meeting in the White House just two months ago. There, as the sun streamed in through the French doors of the Cabinet room, a combative President was pressing 25 Republican Congressmen to support a measure he himself would have ridiculed earlier, a $98 billion tax increase. Many in the room opposed the measure, including Representative Jack F. Kemp of suburban Buffalo, an early advocate of the so-called "supply-side" theory that deep tax cuts by themselves would spur economic recovery.
The room fell silent as Paul Laxalt, the rangy, silver-haired Senator from Nevada, spoke up. Mr. Reagan's closest friend on Capitol Hill, Mr. Laxalt not surprisingly supported the President in seeking the tax increase. But it was a poignant moment. The three-year tax cut, which had been at the heart of Mr.
Reagan's economic program, and which had been enacted amid such promise the previous summer, had been a mistake, Mr. Laxalt said, and now it was time to take corrective action. After all, he reminded listeners, it wasn't as if they had all been true believers in supply-side economics. "If there had been a secret ballot in the Senate last year," he said, "there wouldn't have been more than 12 votes for the tax cut."

QUESTIONS:
6)Which of the following is a plausible claim made by the author of this article?
1. Reagan's economic policies would lower inflation, grow the economy, and balance the budget
2. "Supply-side" economics would spur economic recovery
3. Reagan's plan for economic recovery had failed
4. Reagan's economic plan was supported by both conservative and liberal economists
7). According to the author, what was a major problem with Reaganomics?
1. Congress had failed to pass the legislation necessary to make it work.
2. The tax cut had been a mistake.
3. The tax cut only benefited the wealthy.
4. Only 12 senators supported supply-side economics.

8. )How did Reagan propose to solve to the this problem?
1. He hoped to gain more support from both conservatives and liberals.
2. He wanted Congress to enact deeper tax cuts to spur economic recovery.
3. He wanted Congress to extend the current tax cuts another three years.
4. He wanted to raise taxes.