According to this morning's Washington Post, "Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress are assailing President Bush's strategy to help the elderly afford prescription drugs, with the political parties in rare agreement that the administration wants to devote too little money to solving one of the main problems in the nation's health care system.... House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Republicans want to spend at least $300 billion to subsidize medicine for some older Americans during the coming decade."

I understand the argument that last year's tax cut was designed to get the money out of Washington so it couldn't be spent. I also understand the argument that the tax cut was a bad idea because it dried up resources that would be needed for other things. Both positions are politically and intellectually coherent. What I don't understand is the notion, apparently embraced by most Republicans on the Hill, that we should both get the money out of town and spend it. When we look back in a few years and wonder which party is primarily responsible for the new wave of deficit spending, it's going to be hard for congressional Republicans to argue that their cut - taxes - and - spend - more approach wasn't the primary culprit.
--------