As I have noted a few times, there are only rare occasions in which I don't question the mainstream media (and the overt left partisan press) and assume that their latest axe-grinding issue might, on occasion, have a basis in reality. And invariably when I do, I discover my good faith wasted.
I am discovering that unlike the Who lyrics, be assured "we will get fooled again" - this time by the usual press suspects.
Thus far, I have yet to find where Brownback actually promised or expected that these tax cuts would "increase economic activity that would compensate for missing state revenue". This looks to be another talking point fiction, echo'd by the usual suspects.
I have not found any appeals to "the great Laffer curve" or a "boost in tax revenue". I have yet to find evidence of massive "Tea Party" budget cutting. What I have found is:
a) The tax cuts were a product of mangled politics and brutal in-fighting between 'establishment' Republican ranks and the more conservative members. And the result was typical of the flawed American political system; carve-outs and favors, and a drastic tax cut that was the result of a backfired political strategy and a desire of legislators to get credit for cuts.
b) The primary purpose of Brownback was to re-energize Kansas economic investment, a state that has slowly lost business and population to nearby states for the last 40 years. Exactly how he expected to makeup the short-term difference (cuts?) is unclear. The state legislative analyst had already projected major shortfalls IF taxes were cut and expenditures remained the same (or increased).
c) However, the 'think tank(s)' of Kansas (KPI) who supported the cuts were very clear: the revenue losses were to be made up by an 8 to 9 percent one-time reduction in state spending. EVEN under the dynamic modeling provided by Suffox U to KPI, these 'cuts' were the major means to balance the budget (not the minor compensatory tax revenue from increased economic activity).
d) The 'cuts' were supposed to be about 500 million less a year than is currently being spent - i.e., they never happened.
e) Revenue losses were greater than predicted by all parties, including the legislative analyst.
The lessons, so far, tell us nothing about the policy efficacy of laffer curves or of Tea Party budget cutting. But it does remind us of David Stockman's observations in "The Triumph of Politics" - that the American political system is incapable of rationally implementing policy.
