OK, no good Republican ever met a tax cut he didn't like. That's a given.
So if Republicans always think that whatever the tax rate is right now, it's too high, then they must have some idea of what the "just right" tax rate would be.
So why don't we ask them? "Mr. Republican, sir, if you ran the country, what would your ideal tax structure look like? And please be very specific."
Even the wackiest of the wackos would probably concede that we need to collect taxes for national defense and police. So I doubt you'd see too many of them advocating a tax rate of zero. But it would be darned interesting to see what precise taxes they would support—in public, and on the record.
Of course, they'd trot out the old argument that cutting taxes will boost the economy and lead to more government revenue: yes, the tired old Laffer Curve. Then they'd have to cite their evidence that this would in fact work (there really isn't any—Clinton raised taxes and a huge boom ensued). Anyway, we'd force them to do the math. Cut taxes in half, and you'd need twice the economic activity to maintain tax revenue at current levels. Do they really think that big a boom is in the cards—or would even be desirable?
Of course, they'd talk about the need to cut spending, but they never seem to get very specific about what they'd cut. We'd make them say exactly what, and how much. (Aside: even the conservative think tanks realized that Reagan's ploy to reduce spending by "cutting the government's allowance" was counterproductive: by hiding the true cost of government programs, deficit spending made people want more of them.)
And, because the R's are such sober models of fiscal responsibility, they'd have to pay for every program they didn't cut with tax revenue. Want to pay for your tax cut by slashing Social Security? Fine, but you have to say so, publicly, with real numbers attached. No fantasies about the magic of the unfettered and untaxed free market.
We've let the R's off the hook for far too long: no longer should they be able to just toss out "tax cuts" like there are no negative consequences. Which tax cuts? How much? And what spending are you going to cut to pay for them? And what evidence can you cite that they will do what you say?
The devil, as they say, is in the details.