Does the election of Barack Obama, D-Illinois, who Tuesday will take the oath of office to become the 44th president of the United States, herald a new economic era?

American University professor and political historian Allan J. Lichtman, speaking Monday on CNN, went so far as to argue that it is the end of the conservative economic era ushered in by President Ronald Reagan in 1981 and that the Obama election represents the start of a new liberal era.

In November 1980, Reagan won the presidency in a landslide, with Republicans capturing the Senate, in an election that marked the start of the Reagan Revolution of tax cuts, increases in defense spending, and decreases in the growth of social programs. Reagan's presidency ushered in a broad, secular trend toward privatization and free markets that would eventually encompass all of the world's major economies, including China, and the former Soviet Union, which disbanded in 1991.

The times, they are a changin'

During his Monday interview on CNN, Lichtman went so far as to say that Obama's election marks the end of economic conservatism and the start of new era of liberalism. However, in a column published on January 16 at Gazette.com, a Maryland Community Newspaper, he argued that "Obama should recognize that there is no consensus answer to recovery and reform, and experiment with a mix of market and regulatory approaches." Further, rather than 'governing from the center,' Lichtman said Obama should "move the middle to [him] them by changing the conversation about government and implementing programs that work."

Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, today unveiled a new $210 billion federal spending plan that he says would create jobs in construction and environmental services.

The Obama proposal would invest money over 10 years in two programs, the largest of which would be a $150 billion effort to create 5 million "green collar" jobs to develop more-environmentally friendly energy sources.

The remaining $60 billion would fund a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to rebuild the nation's highways, bridges, airports and other public facilities. Obama said the construction fund would create nearly 2 million jobs, many of them in construction directly - - a sector hard-hit by the housing sector's correction - - the nation's most severe housing slump in more than 20 years.

Rival Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, called Obama's effort unoriginal. Neera Tanden, Clinton's policy director, said Obama was offering ideas Clinton proposed months ago. "Voters may ask themselves that if Senator Obama cannot produce his own ideas on the campaign trail, how will he solve new problems as president?" Tanden said in a memo e-mailed to reporters, The Associated Press reported.

Furthermore, the Republican National Committee, which seeks to portray Obama as a tax-and-spend liberal, included Obama's plan on its 'Obama Spend-O-Meter.' The Republicans assert that Obama's announced programs would add $850 billion in federal spending over four years, including health care, education, national service and foreign aid programs, among others. The RNC's web site did not break down the asserted total by year, but economist Steve Affinito told BloggingStocks Wednesday, assuming equal, annual appropriations of $212.5 billion, the total would not be an unreasonable nor an unwarranted outlay, from an economic standpoint, in his interpretation.

"I don't know where the RNC obtained its $850 billion total, but for the sake of argument, even it was $220 billion per year, that's fairly modest, given the services it includes, including universal health insurance," Affinito said. "Also, given the current state of the economy we may find we may need another $150-$200 billion economic stimulus this year, just to keep the economy growing. So in that regard, Sen. Obama's proposal is insinc with the times and a net positive for the U.S. economy."