It's requires a little math to figure out how much tax cuts are responsible for the deficit, but somehow no one ever seems to quote the relevent figures.

How much more are we spending a year ago? (S3-S2)

How much has revenue dropped? (R3-R2)

What was the surplus last year and the projected one for this year? X2, X3

How much of the drop was due to tax cuts? C3

This number isn't hard to figure. I'm sure revenue is tracked by its source. Simply look at the revenues from the sources where taxes were cut and figure out what they would have been without the cut. If government accounting can't track stuff like this it needs to be reformed before any more monkeying with the system. There's no reason we can't apply a scientific approach to government policy by objectively evaluating the impact of changes. Reduce the loss by any increase in income from the supposed stimulous, but if you want to try that add a penalty if the supposed stimulous shows a negative.

I think it is fair to assign the percentage of the deficit due to tax cuts in proportion to the increase in spending since both have an impact. It is just plain politics to say the deficit is all do to tax cuts or all do to incrteased spending. Some spending has to go up to match inflation and tax cuts also provide some stimulous to counter their negative impact on revenue, but this simple analysis should at least give a ballpark figure good enough for debate. It should also be noted that most people favored an increase in spending for homeland defense and even for defense for the war on terror. That amount really should be subtracted from S3, but I won't fuss if conservatives want to ignore that detail since it was used as cover for pork.

% of deficit due to tax cuts = 100*C*(S3-R3)/(S3-S2+C)

or since the objective was to give the surplus back to the tax payer rather than pay off national debt as a fiscally responsible government would do we should look at the effect of the intended impact. You could use X2 or X3, but I think X2 is the best measure for this approach.

% of surplus intended to be reduced (100*C/X2) times the fraction of the surplus of the swing from surplus to deficit (X2/(X2+S3-R3)) would be another objective measure.

simplified that's 100*C/(X2+S3-R3).

OK liberals and conservatives, figure the result based on what you think the numbers are (and please clearly state) and let's see where the fault really lies. References for estimates would be appreciated.

Regards,
Mark