Think Progress debunks Jon Kyl, indirectly

I was going to respond to the latest by Senator Jon Kyl at Real Clear Politics, but it seems the folks at Think Progress, in ripping into a Frank Luntz memo on framing, have done alot of the work for me. For instance, Kyl makes a claim that the estate tax expiring would be one of the most "egregious" parts of the President's expiring tax cuts.

Hmmm... wonder why?

In actuality, repealing the estate tax would reduce revenues for federal government and state governments - a permanent repeal “would cost $162 billion through 2013” - while providing a “massive windfall for some of the country’s wealthiest families,” as the estate tax affects only about 2 percent of America’s estates. Furthermore, even if the tax is repealed, the estates stand to “still be taxed at the state level.”

Forbid we let that one go to, say, shore up Social Security or pay down the debt.

Kyl has more:

President Bush's tax cuts have benefited all Americans: because the economy has improved, companies are hiring more workers, and businesses are making smarter investment decisions less distorted by arbitrary tax considerations. Moreover, those who own stocks, including tens of millions in 401(k) and other retirement plans, have seen their nest eggs grow.

Think Progress, on Luntz:

As a matter of fact, the 8/12/04 New York Times pointed out, for every dollar spent on Bush’s tax cuts, the economy only received about 59 cents of economic stimulus. That means higher deficits without much bang for the buck. In contrast, “the economic bang for a dollar of aid to state governments is $1.24. Yet such assistance accounted for only 3 percent of the total cost of Mr. Bush’s fiscal policies.”

Thanks for making my job easy, Think Progress.

*UPDATE* I'm not sure why, but I'm getting a lot of hits on this one from Technorati. I imagine you are looking for the series over here. Just start scrolling, and you'll find them soon enough.

Otherwise, thanks for coming by.