"The reality is that during the Reagan years, for instance, we doubled the amount of revenue that we were sending to Washington, D.C. after the tax cuts took effect"
About this Quote
Reagan is doing a lot of heavy lifting here: a talismanic name meant to launder a contemporary argument through a period many conservatives treat as scripture. Pence’s line is crafted to dissolve the apparent contradiction at the heart of tax-cut politics. If tax cuts reduce rates, how do you pay for government? Answer: you don’t have to, because growth will do it for you. The phrase “the reality is” signals an attempted mic-drop, positioning the claim as mere arithmetic rather than ideology.
But the key rhetorical move is the metric: “the amount of revenue… sending to Washington.” That’s vague enough to sound concrete. Is it nominal dollars inflated by price levels and population? A state’s remittance? Federal receipts overall? As stated, it invites listeners to picture a household paying more even after a discount, implying prosperity, not austerity. It’s a pro-tax-cut story that lets the speaker sound fiscally serious without conceding that deficits exist.
The subtext is aimed at intra-conservative anxiety: you can want smaller government and still claim you’re funding it responsibly. Reagan becomes both shield and proof, an appeal to nostalgia for the 1980s as a time when confidence and consumption supposedly outran constraint.
Context matters, because the Reagan years also carried soaring deficits and a complicated tax history (cuts followed by later tax increases). Pence’s sentence is less a history lesson than a permission structure: keep cutting, trust the boom, and treat budget holes as an accounting afterthought rather than a policy choice.
But the key rhetorical move is the metric: “the amount of revenue… sending to Washington.” That’s vague enough to sound concrete. Is it nominal dollars inflated by price levels and population? A state’s remittance? Federal receipts overall? As stated, it invites listeners to picture a household paying more even after a discount, implying prosperity, not austerity. It’s a pro-tax-cut story that lets the speaker sound fiscally serious without conceding that deficits exist.
The subtext is aimed at intra-conservative anxiety: you can want smaller government and still claim you’re funding it responsibly. Reagan becomes both shield and proof, an appeal to nostalgia for the 1980s as a time when confidence and consumption supposedly outran constraint.
Context matters, because the Reagan years also carried soaring deficits and a complicated tax history (cuts followed by later tax increases). Pence’s sentence is less a history lesson than a permission structure: keep cutting, trust the boom, and treat budget holes as an accounting afterthought rather than a policy choice.
Quote Details
| Topic | Money |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Mike
Add to List


