Why did soviet leader mikhail gorbachev push for perestroika or a change in the soviet economy?

a. the soviet economy was growing too fast.
b. the soviet economy was weak and not growing.
c. the soviet economy was strong and growing very quickly.
d. the soviet military needed more economic resources to compete with the united states.

B. The Soviet economy was weak and not growing.

Further details:

A comment from the History Channel explains the situation in the USSR when Gorbachev was in power.  "In 1985, even many of the most conservative hardliners realized that much needed to change. The Soviet economy was faltering and dissidents and internal and external critics were calling for an end to political repression and government secrecy."  As far as the aim of Gorbachev's reforms, "The plan was for the Soviet Union to become more transparent, and in turn for the leadership of the nation and the Communist Party to be improved," according to YourDictionary.

In March 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev proposed policies of perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (openness) in the Soviet Union.  These seemed like policies that leaned in the direction of Western ways of economics and politics.  Perestroika meant allowing some measure of private enterprise in the Soviet Union.  Glasnost meant allowing a bit of freedom in regard to speech and publication.   Gorbachev was not trying to get rid of the Soviet communist system.  He actually was trying to prop it up and preserve it, because it was starting to have many problems sustaining itself, and there was too much dissatisfaction and dissent occurring among the country's people.  But in the end, opening things up a bit with perestroika and glasnost policies pushed the USSR further in the direction of shedding the communist model under which it had lived for so long, and would begin to spell the end of the USSR.

explanation: we can only guess at how our actions may be perceived in the future. doing something really big like killing lots of people, saving lots of people, affecting the lives of lots of people is a sure fire way of being remembered in historical records. we can also make a difference in the history records by being a small influence on something bigger, whether that is as a civil servant, scientist or artist.

of course you could argue that we all affect history just as tiny cogs in a   bigger machine.

if you mean how do people influence our opinions of things which have already happened, then simply by writing a book which looks at things form a different perspective and trying to convince people that this perspective is more accurate or truthful. people do it all the time i.e. richard the third was a terrible or was he? plenty would disagree, it's just that their views aren't the most widely known.n:

im not sure its either a leader of a group of congresspeople or a person from a congressmans district

sorry im not sure