Since the Reagan Revolution of the early 1980s, Republicans have consistently championed tax cuts for individuals and businesses, regardless of whether the economy is booming or in recession or whether the federal budget is in surplus or deficit. In Starving the Beast, sociologist Monica Prasad uncovers the origins of the GOP’s relentless focus on tax cuts and shows how this is a uniquely American phenomenon. Drawing on never-before seen archival documents, Prasad traces the history of the 1981 tax cut—the famous “supply side” tax cut, which became the cornerstone for the next several decades of Republican domestic economic policy. She demonstrates that the main impetus behind this tax cut was not business group pressure, racial animus, or a belief that tax cuts would pay for themselves. Rather, the tax cut emerged because Republicans believed that following World War II, Democrats had created an extremely durable power structure based on offering government programs to Americans, through which they were able to unify an otherwise fractious coalition of farmers, workers, and African Americans and retain control of Congress for four decades. Republicans were reduced to lecturing about balanced budgets, an issue that did not win them many elections. The Republican party began to see tax cuts as an opportunity to alter these basic building blocks of American power. If Democratic power was built out of government programs, Republicans found a new power source in offering tax cuts. Once it became clear that the resulting deficits could be financed by foreign capital, this program reoriented the Republican Party, transforming it from the party of fiscal rectitude into a party whose main domestic policy goal is reducing taxes. With one party promoting government programs to appeal to voters and the other party promoting tax cuts to appeal to voters, and neither party able to generate electoral coalitions around addressing more pressing political and economic problems, this history reveals problems at the heart of contemporary American democracy itself. Prasad suggests some ways forward. Since the end of World War II, many European nations have combined strong social protections with policies to stimulate economic growth such as lower taxes on capital and less regulation on businesses than in the U.S. Starving the Beast suggests that taking inspiration from this model of progressive policies embedded in market-promoting political economy could serve to build an American economy that works better for all.

For thirty years prominent voices have advocated a policy of starving the beast cutting taxes to force government spending cuts. This paper analyzes the macroeconomic and welfare consequences of this policy using a two-country general equilibrium model. Under several strong assumptions the policy, if fully implemented, produces domestic output and welfare gains accompanied by losses elsewhere. But negative effects can easily arise in the presence of longer policy implementation lags, utility-enhancing government spending, and productive government capital. Overall, the analysis finds no support for the idea that starving the beast is a foolproof way towards higher output and welfare.

Why a book defending government? Because for decades, right-wing forces in this country have engaged in a relentless and irresponsible campaign of vicious government bashing. Conservatives and libertarians have demonized government, attacked basic safety net programs like Medicare, and undermined vital regulations that protect consumers, investors, workers, and the environment. This book takes on this anti-government movement and shows that most of its criticisms of this institution are highly exaggerated, misleading, or just plain wrong. In reality, American government - despite its flaws - plays a valuable and indispensable role in promoting the public good. Most government programs are working well and are actually improving the lives of Americans in innumerable ways. Democratic government is a vital tool for making our world a better place; and if we want an America that is prosperous, healthy, secure, well-educated, just, compassionate, and unpolluted, we need a strong, active, and well-funded public sector. Part I: Why Government is Good. The section of the book describes how government acts as a force for good in society. One chapter chronicles a day in the life of an average middle-class American and identifies the myriad ways that government programs improve our lives. Other chapters describe the forgotten achievements of government; how government is the only way to effectively promote public values like justice and equality; and how a free market economy would be impossible without the elaborate legal and regulatory infrastructure provided by government. Part II: The War on Government. This section of the book chronicles the unrelenting assault on government being waged by conservative forces in this country. Chapters describe how cuts in social programs and rollbacks of regulations have harmed the health, safety, and welfare of millions of Americans and how these assaults have taken place on many fronts - in Congress, the administrative branch, and the federal courts, as well as on the state and local level. Also addressed: how the right's radical anti-government agenda is out of touch with the views and priorities of most Americans, and what the real truth is about government deficits. Part III: How to Revitalize Democracy and Government. There are, in fact, some problems with American government, and we need to address these if we are to restore Americans' faith in this institution. One of the main problems with our government is that it is not accountable and responsive enough to the public. Moneyed special interests too often win out over the public interest. Chapters in this section describe this problem and how we can fix it. There are several reforms - including public financing of elections - that could help our government live up to its democratic ideals. The final chapter discusses strategies for building a pro-government coalition in this country.

In recent years, some fiscal conservatives have argued that reducing tax revenues and increasing budget deficits is an effective strategy for limiting federal spending. This strategy is commonly known as “starve the beast.” Niskanen (2006) convincingly demonstrates that reductions in federal revenue do not limit the growth of federal expenditures. Instead, he finds statistically significant evidence that revenue reductions actually stimulate the growth of federal spending. However, proponents of starve the beast argue that low federal revenues might be able to limit the growth of certain components of the budget, such as nondefense discretionary spending. Similarly, others argue that federal revenue reductions might be more effective at limiting expenditure growth during times of peace. However, my analysis strengthens Niskanen's original research by finding that his results are consistent across time. Furthermore, I find that reductions in federal revenues constrain neither the growth of peacetime federal spending nor the growth of nondefense discretionary spending.

Argues that ecologist Charles Darwin's understanding of competition describes economic reality far more accurately than economist Adam Smith's theories ever did.

"In this book, Bartlett attacks the Bush Administration's economic performance root and branch, from the "stovepiping" of its policy process to the coercive tactics used to ram its policies through Congress, to the effects of the policies themselves. He is especially hard on Bush s enormous new Medicare entitlement and predicts that within a few years, Bush's tax cuts and unrestricted spending will produce an economic crisis that will require a major tax increase, probably in the form of a European-style VAT."--BOOK JACKET.

As a domestic policy advisor to Ronald Reagan, Bruce Bartlett was one of the originators of Reaganomics, the supply-side economic theory that conservatives have clung to for decades. In The New American Economy, Bartlett goes back to the economic roots that made Impostor a bestseller and abandons the conservative dogma in favor of a policy strongly based on what's worked in the past. Marshalling compelling history and economics, he explains how economic theories that may be perfectly valid at one moment in time under one set of circumstances tend to lose validity over time because they are misapplied under different circumstances. Bartlett makes a compelling, historically-based case for large tax increases, once anathema to him and his economic allies. In The New American Economy, Bartlett seeks to clarify a compelling and way forward for the American economy.