News
As Congress moved closer this week to making President George W. Bush's promises of a sweeping tax cut a reality, agreeing to push through an 11-year $1.35 trillion reduction, economists on all sides of the ideological spectrum have scrambled to insert their views into the policy-making process.
At Dartmouth, Economics Professor Jonathan Skinner has made the case that failing markets will dampen the projected surplus and people will receive less money in tax refunds than they may think.
Skinner, who injected himself into the often bitter debate over Bush's tax cut in the April 12 "Christian Science Monitor," recently elaborated on his ideas in an interview with The Dartmouth.
Although a common belief may be that the tax cuts are an effort to pull the country out of the current economic downturn, Skinner said that such an objective was not on the president's mind, nor is it a definite effect of the cuts.
"The tax cut is backloaded, so that the bulk of the money comes later when we may be in a boom or a recession," Skinner explained.
The President's logic, according to Skinner, is that the surplus of money during Clinton's administration was being spent on unnecessary projects.
"If you leave money floating around in Washington, it gets spent," Skinner stated in clarification of Bush's view of the economy.
As the President discussed the possible cuts Tuesday, he expressed his concern with Washington spenders.
"I'm absolutely convinced we'll be able to fund the tax cuts," Bush said.