In an analysis of Rudy Giuliani's new campaign ad, Howard Kurtz asserted that Giuliani's claim that "reducing taxes produces more revenues" is "a matter of fierce dispute among economists." As evidence of this dispute, Kurtz provided the opinion of only one economist, Larry Kudlow, who agreed with Giuliani's assertion. But a day before Kurtz's analysis appeared in print, a Washington Post editorial had quoted Edward Lazear, chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, stating, "I certainly would not claim that tax cuts pay for themselves." Several other current or former Bush administration officials have also disagreed with the assertion that tax cuts produce more revenue.
On CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck, David E. Williams, vice president of policy for Citizens Against Government Waste, asserted that "the tax cuts are ... really what's saving this country right now. ... Believe it or not, tax cuts bring in revenue." However, several Bush administration officials have stated that tax cuts, including those enacted during the Bush administration, produce a net decrease in revenue, including Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, who said during his confirmation hearing, "As a general rule, I don't believe that tax cuts pay for themselves."
On PBS' Washington Week, John Dickerson asserted that there will "perhaps [be] a tax increase to fix the alternative minimum tax," which he claimed "gets the Republicans very exercised and excited" because they "can go around talking about how Democrats are going to raise taxes." In fact, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) has authored a proposal that would, according to the accompanying press release, "provide tax relief to more than 90 million working families through a permanent repeal of the individual alternative minimum tax (AMT) and enhancement of other tax benefits." The press release also stated that Rangel's plan is "entirely revenue-neutral."
On Morning Joe, Larry Kudlow asserted that "on the campaign trail, Democrats trashing this economy, talking about raising taxes across the board are totally, utterly missing the boat here." In fact, the leading Democratic candidates for president have all proposed economic plans that include some tax cuts.
In his OpinionJournal.com column, former Delaware Gov. Pete du Pont wrote that "[t]ax rate reductions increase tax revenues. This truth has been proved at both state and federal levels, including by President Bush's 2003 tax cuts on income, capital gains and dividends." However, several former and current Bush administration economists have stated that tax cuts, including those passed under Bush, produce a net decrease in revenue.
George Will wrote that Sen. Clinton "stridently opposed" President Bush's "advocacy of personal accounts financed by a portion of individuals' Social Security taxes" and suggested that her recent proposal to offer a matching tax credit to families that invest in 401(k) retirement accounts reflects "an undisclosed epiphany," after which "she belatedly recognizes that 401(k) funds invested in equities are a foundation for security." But contrary to Will's suggestion, Clinton has long expressed support for tax credits for retirement investments, while opposing the diversion of Social Security payments into private accounts.
Fox News' Steve Brown claimed that Sen. Hillary Clinton would pay for her health care plan by "repealing the Bush tax cuts." Brown's report was accompanied by on-screen text that claimed "paying the price tag" for Clinton's health care plan would include "End[ing] Bush Tax Cuts." In fact, according to Clinton's plan, she would "discontinue portions of the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000."
Reporting on Rudy Giuliani's tax cut proposals, the Associated Press and ABC News' Jake Tapper gave no indication that they asked Giuliani or that Giuliani had spoken about how he would make up for the decrease in revenue that would result from enacting his proposals.