Russ Feingold: “that article commented on the Contract With America, and specifically the Archer proposal, by saying the following: The…”

“that article commented on the Contract With America, and specifically the Archer proposal, by saying the following: The tax cuts from the House Republican ``Contract With America'' have been reduced to legislative form. The process hasn't improved them a bit. They remain a bad idea, the revenue loss from which would be more than the sponsors have acknowledged, and more than a government running a deficit of a fifth of a trillion dollars a year can afford it give up. The cuts would make it harder to reduce the deficit even if the Republicans do come up with a way to pay for them, which despite their pledges, they haven't yet. The stated purpose of several of them is to increase savings and investment, but by leaving the deficit larger than otherwise, they would reduce the national savings rate. The editorial also goes into a bit of a history: The last time the Republicans cut taxes, in 1981, they failed to make the spending cuts to match, and the deficit soared. This time they've said the spending cuts will come first; they're still saying that. But the only specific spending cuts of any size that they've advanced thus far have been in welfare and other programs for the poor; that's not the way to finance tax cuts. It is said they next proposed some generalized entitlement and appropriations cuts, lump sums they will commit themselves to saving over time without spelling out how.…”