“The purpose of economic policy is growth, jobs, and prosperity,” supply-side founder Art Laffer told me today. As such, Laffer has endorsed Newt Gingrich and the Gingrich 15 percent flat-tax plan, which includes the 12.5 percent corporate-tax reform. “It’s nothing against the other candidates,” Laffer said. “But Newt’s plan is right, and therefore endorsing him is the right thing to do.”
Laffer is concerned with the fact that Mitt Romney has no tax-reform plan, and he worries that Romney doesn’t believe in the incentive model of economic growth. “He’s a good man,” Laffer said. “And he would make a good president. But he needs a bold tax plan.”
Art Laffer believes the Gingrich plan would help jolt the economy to 4 or 5 percent growth. And he also is impressed that Gingrich has been talking about King Dollar on the campaign trail along with his supply-side tax strategy.
Was Gingrich actually one of the original supply-siders? Well, no. But he did hang around with Jack Kemp and others during the early 1980s in what became known as the Opportunity Society. So Newt’s bona fides are there.
Laffer also is impressed with Gingrich’s bipartisan abilities. He noted that Newt worked with Bill Clinton during the “Contract with America” 1990s to get welfare reform and a lower capital-gains tax.
What about the inevitable criticism from Obama that a flat tax is a huge tax cut for the rich? “Listen,” Art told me. “We want to make the poor, rich. And you can’t love jobs while hating job-creators.”
Whether Gingrich’s supply-side bus tour and Art Laffer’s endorsement help him in the remaining days of the Iowa campaign remains to be seen. Polls suggest that Newt is a stock still looking for a bottom. His campaign to use federal marshals to haul judges before Congress is way off the economic-growth message and did him a lot of damage. That’s what the latest polls suggest.
Now, if Gingrich can stay on message, and stick with supply-side solutions for growth, jobs, and prosperity, he could still bounce back over the next five days. But he must be disciplined and stay on message.
...But he must be disciplined and stay on message.
I have a list of six ways I can stay on message.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseArt Laffer endorses Gingrich
Peter Schiff endorses Ron Paul.
Judge for yourself
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAren't you the regretful poster calling others "phony" in the most childish manner?
Schiff was an economic adviser to Ron Paul in 2008. His endorsement is not news. His Senate campaign in the Primary was rather lackluster - he couldn't even beat Simmons.
What is interesting, we know more and more Democrats are eager to push for Dr. Paul to weaken the GOP offering. It will not work, Obama is a mess - the Democratic Party is a disaster.
"Paul is doing the best job of getting those people who aren't really Republicans but say they're going to vote in the Republican primary," explains Smith. Among that group are libertarians, dissatisfied independents and Democrats who are "trying to throw a monkey wrench in the campaign by voting for someone who is more philosophically extreme," says Smith."
It is quite possible, Ron Paul will win the Cindy Sheehan endorsement. Obama's foreign policy was never so wonderfully expressed, by the anti-USA mindset provided by Dr. Paul. Did he really believe the USA should never have fought against the AXIS in WW2?
Wow...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou're just the guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. You are truly clueless. It is hilarious. In 1939-1941 the Republican party was against entering the war in Europe. Mr Republican Robert Taft was the leading voice of those opposed entering the war. A young Gerald Ford was a member of the American First committee which opposed our entry into the war. And how can we forget Herbert Hoover's long buried assessment of Franklin Roosevelt and "The Good War."
External Link
You're in the wrong party. You're a liberal internationalist in the mold of Woodrow Wilson. In other words a NeoCon
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseyou beat me to the punch.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse* Remember Mr. Kudlow, Art Laffer publicly stated he voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996.
It is silly to see Mr. Kudlow still offer a little "hope" for Newt, as he is not a Reaganite anymore. His sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi at the request of Al Gore in 2008 is evidence of the folly.
Mr. Gingrich is a very tired Beltway Celebrtiy who was on the dole of Fannie and Freddie. Newt remains an Icon of what Americans have historic levels of contempt for these days - the Washington Swamp. Gingrich is just as poor of a selection as another Beltway Insider in 2008, named John McCain. Both have no real private sector ability, no proven executive experience, no sincere economic clout, no stable temperament, no "outsider" credentials, no potential to win a National Election in this Era.
Mr. Kudlow knows better than anyone about Newt Gingrich's enormous failure as Speaker, the inept, self serving, dysfunction. Newt actually enabled the opposite in the 1990's - blowing an enormous opportunity (the failure was so catastrophic politically it actually helped to reelect Bill Clinton in 1996).
Newt isn't interested in supply-side economics, he is interested in Newt Gingrich.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDidn't Laffer also back the debacle that was Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan, complete with its amorphous "opportunity zones," etc.?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLove Art and listen to any and everything he has to say about the economy. I agree with him 100% on Newt. I hope Newt puts him in his cabinet when he is president!!!!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLove Art and listen to any and everything he says about economics. I hope Newt puts him in his cabinet along with John Bolton when he is president. Time to take the rookies out of the white house and put them back in their playpen, and time once again to put the grownups back in charge. When will people ever learn?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"can stay on message", meaning "remember to tell the same lie next time".
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse