Democrats are making
a lot of the 1981 Reagan tax cut as a cautionary tale -- leading as it did to a generation of budgetary red ink.
But isn't there an even better example more close at hand? A few years back Governor George W. Bush passed a hefty tax cut in Texas.
(No doubt Bush was into the bill on its own merits. But passing the bill was a key part of proving his tax-cutting, conservative bona-fides going into the 2000 Republican presidential primaries. So we can call it the Rove-Bush bill.)
In order to push through this whopper cut they low-balled estimates for future spending requirements, relied on fanciful budgeting projections, and assumed continued swollen tax receipts from a roaring economy.
And now, you guessed it, the chicken has come home to roost. According to this helpful article in Time the state faces a potential budget shortfall of some $700 million dollars. The Texas state constitution bars deficit spending. So state budgeteers are going to have to cut spending on all sorts of programs for road construction, health care, education. Or even conceivably raise taxes. (But don't bet on that.)
Any of this sound familiar? Doesn't the comparison seem really on point? And, if so, why aren't DC Dems talking about it more?