In fact, three of the top GOP candidates are proposing even bigger cuts than Romney did as the 2012 nominee:
@jimpagels it’s not misleading, it’s just emphasizing the outsized gains from large tax breaks that go to the wealthy— Derek Thompson (@DKThomp) February 12, 2016
A reader quotes from Derek’s new piece:
Conservatives counter that tax cuts might invigorate investment, spur entrepreneurship and hiring, and accelerate growth. This may be, but defenders of President George W. Bush said the same about his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, and few recall the last 15 years for their magical growth rates. The truth is that nobody knows how an unprecedented budget upheaval would affect the rate of GDP growth in a complex global economy, because, well, it is hard to forecast something that is unprecedented.
We know exactly what will happen, just look at Kansas.
Obviously, the federal government does not currently have a requirement to balance the budget (as most states do), but if Rubio is serious about implementing the same requirement at the federal level, we will have Kansas on a country-wide scale. In Kansas, these “supply-side” or “consumption-based” tax schemes have not boosted the economy and have only led to huge budget shortfalls—the likes of which are wreaking havoc on the state’s highway and education funding (Governor Brownback cut another $45 million from public schools, making the total cuts over the past two years something close to $150 million).
The reality, as Derek Thompson states, is that this is part of the plan. Starve the government of needed funds and force it to contract. It is what the Tea Party has been advocating since they came into existence. While it doesn’t seem that politicians will openly admit to this being their goal, the evidence is as plain as day.