It used to be that Republican “moderates” would portray themselves as socially moderate, but fiscally conservative. Now, however, they’re not even fiscally conservative anymore:
The tax plan proposed by Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich would add $1.3 trillion to the U.S. budget deficit in 2015 alone, a new analysis shows, complicating his goal of balancing the government’s books.
The analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center compares the federal government’s take under Gingrich’s proposal with projected U.S. revenue if current tax law ran its course and existing income tax cuts expired as scheduled after 2012.
One interesting aspect of this presidential campaign is that it has revealed the Republican candidates to be every bit as unwilling to cut government programs as the Democrats. As numerous observers have pointed out, the Republicans elected to the House in 2010 were elected to do one thing: reign in federal spending. And they have manifestly failed to do that.
Tax cuts are definitely desirable, but they are less desirable and less necessary than spending cuts. And tax cuts without spending cuts means even more debt.
This is why a second Obama term would be vastly preferable to either a Romney or Gingrich presidency. Obama is actually more constrained on spending by a Republican House than either of the two Republicans would be. It’s almost beside the point to describe any of the three as being Democrats or Republicans, though. They all belong to the Bank Party.