GOP Debate in Iowa Fails To Deliver a Pro-Growth Message To Vanquish Obama

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

Color me cranky about this week’s Republican presidential debate in Iowa. The headline stories were about whether Newt Gingrich actually lobbied for Freddie Mac, or why Mitt Romney changed his positions on gay rights, guns, and abortion. But a GOP growth message to defeat President Obama was completely missing in this debate. It was a supply-side whiff.

This election is principally about the economy and its poor performance. It’s about the slow rate of growth, the high rate of unemployment, and the tax, regulatory, spending, and monetary obstacles conjured up by President Obama that are holding back the animal spirits that are so essential to job creation and prosperity.

Risk-taking is virtually absent today. Business profits are strong, but firms won’t make commitments in front of Obamacare, regulations, mandates, and tax threats. The president is on the campaign trail with a leftist, class-warfare message. He blames successful entrepreneurs for their wealth, and slurs high-powered businesses at every turn.  His is a big-government planning vision, an FDR-like vision.

But where was the GOP response in Sioux City, Iowa?

Mr. Gingrich has a pro-growth 15% flat-tax-reform program. But he never mentioned it. He recalled that he campaigned with Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp. But he neglected to talk about their supply-side tax reforms that ignited growth and ended the stagflation of the 1970s.

If Newt truly understands the supply-side power of low marginal tax rates, he should talk about it and connect it to job creation and growth. But he didn’t. This was a disappointment.

Governor Romney has a business-tax reform to lower the corporate rate to 25%. This is good as far as it goes (lower would be better). But so far, Mr. Romney has not proposed a flat-tax reform for individuals that would slash rates and broaden the base. Meanwhile, his staff has been trashing the flat taxes proposed by Mr. Gingrich and Governor Perry. Does Mr. Romney believe in the incentive-model of growth?

 

Oh, by the way, what about sound money and King Dollar, preferably linked to gold, which would have avoided the subprime financial catastrophe? Does either Messrs. Romney or Gingrich have a dollar policy? If so, tell us.

If you go back to the Reagan era, recall that the Gipper had a simple yet powerful economic-growth message: Across-the-board tax cuts to generate growth incentives, deregulation to unleash business, limited domestic spending to stop government meddling, and a strong dollar to vanquish inflation.

It was a simple four-point program, sometimes called the “four pillars of wisdom.” It was easy to understand, made good practical sense, and constituted a completely different vision than the big-government plans of Jimmy Carter. Today’s candidates need to emulate Reagan.

Now, there are kudos for the two frontrunners. All is not dark.

Newt had a terrific moment when he defended the Keystone pipeline in terms of job creation, energy security, and saving blue-collar workers from extinction. He understands that Canada is our friend and ally, but that they’ll build a pipeline to the Pacific and sell oil to China if we turn them down. This is good. He also understands that Obama is ruled by the radical environmentalists who are destroying blue-collar jobs and American energy security.

And Mr. Romney gets kudos on reforming Medicare with a hybrid system that would keep the existing plan as an option, but would offer free-market choice and competition for private healthinsurance programs. Wunderkind Paul Ryan recently adopted this Romney approach. This is good.

But the best I can say is that on taxes, spending, regulations, and money, the frontrunners skirted around the edges or missed completely. Regarding economic growth, they did not clarify. They did not connect. They did not vanquish Mr. Obama in the Iowa debate.


The New York Sun

© 2024 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use