Bush is now claiming his tax cuts have reduced the deficits. The reduction he's bragging about is a reduction against the 2004 deficit estimate.  In other words, Bush is claiming that his tax policies have reduced the deficit to a level that it never (thankfully) even reached.

The jist of the Bush argument is that estimated budget deficits as a percentage of GDP fell from 3.2% to 2.3%, even with huge projected expenses from Katrina and the Iraq War. In other words, no need to cut spending, because the tax cuts pay for themselves.

But the devil is in the details. One problem with that line of thinking is that it ignores the TOTAL federal deficit as a percentage of GDP under Bush is as high as it was under Clinton's tax-and-spend policies and twice as high as it was under Nixon.  In other words, the total debt per American citizen is at record high under Bush's policies.  Another way of looking at it, is that Bush has added $3.75 of long term debt for every dollar he's given the U.S. taxpayer in a tax cut.   Bush's "supply side" economic plan of giving a short term tax breaks financed with long term debt has resulted in LESS revenue growth not more.

The Laffer Curve was always used as sucker bait for fools who think that you can get something for nothing.  But the fact remains that the additional tax revenue that may result is NEVER more then the deficits they create.