Read my lips, no new taxes (or existing taxes)

When Bush claimed that there would be no tax increases to pay for the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast, he took a fairly wire-reaching view of what a tax increase is. Apparently, for Bush, not cutting taxes is a tax increase. Instead, he would rather just cut already low spending on Americans who are not in the top 1% of income earners than see any additional tax cuts for the top 1% or corporations trimmed down. In a period of increased government spending and an impending economic slowdown (which will lower tax revenues), his priorities are all wrong. What he should do is roll back the tax cuts he gave in 2001, 2002 and 2003, ditch the elimination of the estate tax and reduction of capital gains and dividend tax cuts. In order to truly help the economy, the reconstruction should be funded by the government, if necessary using deficit funding. It is one thing to spend $200 billion on a one-time payment to rebuild after the storm's destruction, even when financed by deficit spending, as long as the structural (long-term) deficit caused by the tax cuts is shrunk or eliminated. A one-time rebuilding of the Gulf Coast will increase economic growth, particularly in the affected area and in the long run will increase taxes (because of the stronger economy). Tax cuts for the rich, on the other hand, do little for the economy (rich people just save it away (instead of spending most of it, which would stimulate the economy) and create structural deficits that stretch way into the future as tax revenues will never recover. Supply-side economics is a failed doctrine and Bush should recognize that and switch towards a more proven, more Keynesian economic policy.