revenue as well. clearly the 86 tax reform act got america growing again and it lasted for a sustained period of time. and that s the effort that we re under way to accomplish right now, dana. you re saying at this end of the day, you want this to be much more than a tax overhaul. are you confident it will not add to the federal deficit? this is a conservative estimate of how much growth we re likely to get out of this kind of tax reform. look, we have been studying this for quite a while, we have been waiting for the opportunity doing it, donald trump being elected president and the republicans having a majority in the house and senate, give us an opportunity to accomplish something really important for the american economy, get it growing again. i don t think president trump gets enough credit for doing what he s been doing.
conservative estimate of how much growth we re likely to get out of this pro-growth tax reform that we re in the middle of accomplishing. well, you re arguing now that they re going to spur growth and then that, in the end, will make the tax cuts pay for themselves. but there s really no evidence, historically, that that happens. i ll just give you some examples, according to the cbo, the reagan tax cuts reduced revenue by $445 billion over four years, and the bush tax cuts did the same thing. they added $1.7 trillion to the national debt over ten years. well, you re referring to the wrong bill. reagan signed tax reform 31 years ago today, and this is a tax reform bill, designs to make america grow more. and there was a gush of revenue after the 86 tax reform bill. the two bills you referred to were different bills, but i would argue that would produce more revenue, as well. but clearly, the 86 tax reform act got america growing again, and it lasted for a sustained