What do you think?
Rate this book
For the Record: From Wall Street to Washington
The deposed Chief of Staff charts his political rise and fall, offering a lively critique of the Reagan administration, particularly "Irangate" and the ensuing chaos for which many blamed Regan
458 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 1989
4 people are currently reading
114 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
December 2, 2020
Ah, to be 20 and read something just because it's in front of you.
November 13, 2019
With all the political turbulence in which we’re awash these days, you might wonder why I would read a book from more than 30 years ago that would seem on the surface to be irrelevant today. The thing is, it’s not all that irrelevant; it was highly readable, and it fascinated me to the back cover.
This is Regan’s memoir of his years spent in service to the Reagan administration. It is an account of hope and excitement that turned to bitterness, betrayal, and an unhealable schism between two high-profile people.
The hope and excitement comes when Regan, contemplating his retirement, agrees to postpone it and serve as Reagan’s treasury secretary. He describes the people he dealt with in that position and focused on shepherding his tax restructuring plan into law.
Again, he considered retirement, but he simply couldn’t pass up the chance to serve as Reagan’s chief of staff—and herein lies the eventual bitterness and betrayal.
You’ll read about Nancy Reagan’s obsession with an astrologer who largely dictated the president’s schedule, much to the frustration and sometimes anger of Regan. As the Iran-Contra scandal heated up, Nancy would refuse to allow Regan to schedule press conferences and speaking engagements even though doing so would make Reagan look better and appear to be more on top of the situation.
Eventually, from Regan’s point of view at least, he is thrown under the bus by Reagan and pushed out of the job. There remained a bitter chasm between the two men ever after.
There is a fascinating chapter in here Regan calls Dysjournalism. In it, he diagrams the numerous ways in which leaks happen. He has plenty to say about the unfair coverage he got considering Iran-Contra, but there isn’t nearly the kind of press and presidency divisions that mark today’s presidency and even the previous administration, for that matter.
This is Regan’s memoir of his years spent in service to the Reagan administration. It is an account of hope and excitement that turned to bitterness, betrayal, and an unhealable schism between two high-profile people.
The hope and excitement comes when Regan, contemplating his retirement, agrees to postpone it and serve as Reagan’s treasury secretary. He describes the people he dealt with in that position and focused on shepherding his tax restructuring plan into law.
Again, he considered retirement, but he simply couldn’t pass up the chance to serve as Reagan’s chief of staff—and herein lies the eventual bitterness and betrayal.
You’ll read about Nancy Reagan’s obsession with an astrologer who largely dictated the president’s schedule, much to the frustration and sometimes anger of Regan. As the Iran-Contra scandal heated up, Nancy would refuse to allow Regan to schedule press conferences and speaking engagements even though doing so would make Reagan look better and appear to be more on top of the situation.
Eventually, from Regan’s point of view at least, he is thrown under the bus by Reagan and pushed out of the job. There remained a bitter chasm between the two men ever after.
There is a fascinating chapter in here Regan calls Dysjournalism. In it, he diagrams the numerous ways in which leaks happen. He has plenty to say about the unfair coverage he got considering Iran-Contra, but there isn’t nearly the kind of press and presidency divisions that mark today’s presidency and even the previous administration, for that matter.
October 4, 2017
A damn fine book and well written, too, although it leaves me with more questions about Regan than answers. I always assumed that he was a worse chief of staff than Baker was. Certainly the Reagan presidency took a downward spin after Regan took over that position. The book has a tone of self-defense throughout as though Regan is primarily concerned with answering the charges against him. This tends to make me distrust his narrative a bit, although he comes across as a staggering intellect—especially compared to some of the jokers in the Reagan administration like McFarlane and Meese.
May 17, 2022
Slightly dull and boring. I wouldn't say it was a page turner. Nancy Reagan, apparently kept Ronnie nuts in her purse. You had to go through her to get to him. They were a political unit. I guess you could say she was a Hillary but just not as big a bitch. And of course she never wanted to be President.
November 26, 2019
Well written, kept my interest. I felt like Regan told his side of the story with integrity. Learned more about the inner working of the Reagan presidency.
October 30, 2023
Awesome book for bedtime! Probably the most boring book I've ever cracked open. It took me almost six months to read because I would fall asleep every few pages. Found the cure for insomnia
November 24, 2025
Very defensive about the Iran-Contra. It was a time giants strode the lands, and great changes were made. The absences of the Soviet Union makes a foreign policy a smaller and less precise thing.
August 17, 2017
A fairly straightforward read in terms of organization and the prose. The big reveal is that Nancy Reagan relied on an un-named psychic to determine which days were good and bad for presidential activities. Throughout the book, Regan hammers at this in loud and quiet ways, rightly showing its ridiculousness. The villains in the book are the ill-informed press, those who leak misleading or false information to the ill-informed press, Nancy Reagan, several Congressional Democrats, and maybe McFarlane and Poindexter.
Regan touches on a several areas of his life and time in government. He focuses on Iran-Contra, his work on tax policy while at the Treasury Department, his youth in Boston, and his time in the Marines and on Wall Street. He touches upon Washington culture of leaks and misinformation and finds, without saying it explicitly, that there is much dishonor, double-speak, lack of keeping your word, and good people getting hurt.
Specifically:
Iran-Contra: Regan tries to demonstrate that he had very little do with this. He heard about some plans to sell weapons to Iran but claims that his purview as Chief of Staff was domestic and that he let the National Security Advisor do as he wished in foreign affairs. In the end he blames an out of control National Security Council (NSC) staff for the problem and hints only generally that Reagan might have trusted people too much and gave them a big idea and left it for them to implement. Not being steeped in all of this, it seems preposterous that the NSC, a policy-coordinating body, would be equipped to handle what is essentially an intelligence operation. In other words, more people must have been involved.
Tax Policy: He does a good job describing the tax policy changes he sought and some steps he took to promote it, but there are some details missing of how it was achieved. He notes opposition but does not really describe how it was overcome except perhaps getting Reagan to take personal interest in pushing it.
Russia: He does a good job describing the two summits he was involved with at Genera and in Iceland. I did enjoy the scene setting he did for the Geneva summit, the first one between Reagan and Gorbachev. The details are useful and provide a sense of the mood at the time. Given that this is my first real reading of the account of what happened in Iceland, I am a bit confused why SDI was such a sticking point for Reagan. I can only believe that Reagan had an investment in seeing his idea come to fruition even through it was very questionable at the time (and today!) that such a technical and engineering challenge could be successful at anything close to the scale desired and at a reasonable price. If they could get an reasonable agreement to eliminate nuclear ballistic missiles, that would seem a bigger win than keeping this theoretical capability.
Reagan: He provides a mixed picture of Reagan. He clearly likes the president and sees good qualities in him, but he also describes the president’s desire to avoid personal confrontation. That’s a big weakness when dealing with Type-A advisors who will take the vague and casual guidance and implement it. Regan himself has to do this with his work at Treasury, never getting a good sense of what the Reagan wanted except by examining speeches and comments and only occasionally talking to the president. Reagan also comes across as engaged when he wants to be and a great communicator, mostly because he knows how to plays roles, given his past as an actor. He notes the constant reinforcement of Reagan’s confidence that was needed; the constant reassurance.
In the end, he may like Reagan, but ends the book on quite a bitter tone. He feels that he was dishonorably pushed out of his Chief of Staff job and that he was not treated well. He is disappointed in how Reagan can’t tell him he is out man-to-man but is told by the vice president and via a leak about his successor. His last page is particularly bitter. At the time of the writing he says he had not spoken to the president and then matter of factly reprints the laudatory letter Reagan sent him after leaving his position. Regan notes he had seen many such letters as Chief of Staff and that he knew someone else had written it for Reagan. Ouch.
Regan touches on a several areas of his life and time in government. He focuses on Iran-Contra, his work on tax policy while at the Treasury Department, his youth in Boston, and his time in the Marines and on Wall Street. He touches upon Washington culture of leaks and misinformation and finds, without saying it explicitly, that there is much dishonor, double-speak, lack of keeping your word, and good people getting hurt.
Specifically:
Iran-Contra: Regan tries to demonstrate that he had very little do with this. He heard about some plans to sell weapons to Iran but claims that his purview as Chief of Staff was domestic and that he let the National Security Advisor do as he wished in foreign affairs. In the end he blames an out of control National Security Council (NSC) staff for the problem and hints only generally that Reagan might have trusted people too much and gave them a big idea and left it for them to implement. Not being steeped in all of this, it seems preposterous that the NSC, a policy-coordinating body, would be equipped to handle what is essentially an intelligence operation. In other words, more people must have been involved.
Tax Policy: He does a good job describing the tax policy changes he sought and some steps he took to promote it, but there are some details missing of how it was achieved. He notes opposition but does not really describe how it was overcome except perhaps getting Reagan to take personal interest in pushing it.
Russia: He does a good job describing the two summits he was involved with at Genera and in Iceland. I did enjoy the scene setting he did for the Geneva summit, the first one between Reagan and Gorbachev. The details are useful and provide a sense of the mood at the time. Given that this is my first real reading of the account of what happened in Iceland, I am a bit confused why SDI was such a sticking point for Reagan. I can only believe that Reagan had an investment in seeing his idea come to fruition even through it was very questionable at the time (and today!) that such a technical and engineering challenge could be successful at anything close to the scale desired and at a reasonable price. If they could get an reasonable agreement to eliminate nuclear ballistic missiles, that would seem a bigger win than keeping this theoretical capability.
Reagan: He provides a mixed picture of Reagan. He clearly likes the president and sees good qualities in him, but he also describes the president’s desire to avoid personal confrontation. That’s a big weakness when dealing with Type-A advisors who will take the vague and casual guidance and implement it. Regan himself has to do this with his work at Treasury, never getting a good sense of what the Reagan wanted except by examining speeches and comments and only occasionally talking to the president. Reagan also comes across as engaged when he wants to be and a great communicator, mostly because he knows how to plays roles, given his past as an actor. He notes the constant reinforcement of Reagan’s confidence that was needed; the constant reassurance.
In the end, he may like Reagan, but ends the book on quite a bitter tone. He feels that he was dishonorably pushed out of his Chief of Staff job and that he was not treated well. He is disappointed in how Reagan can’t tell him he is out man-to-man but is told by the vice president and via a leak about his successor. His last page is particularly bitter. At the time of the writing he says he had not spoken to the president and then matter of factly reprints the laudatory letter Reagan sent him after leaving his position. Regan notes he had seen many such letters as Chief of Staff and that he knew someone else had written it for Reagan. Ouch.
December 31, 2014
Kiln fires Western politics feet of clay. Fascinating.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews