In an interview yesterday, California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman (R) said “what I want to convince voters of is I am the very best person to fix the economy in California.” “I am not actually a politician. I am a businessperson. I have created jobs, I have met budgets, I have done, figured out how to do more with less, and that is actually a really important thing for the state right now,” she said.

However, according to a new Center for American Progress Action Fund analysis by Michael Reich, an Economics Professor at The University of California at Berkeley, Whitman’s economic plan — outlined in Meg 2010, Building a New California — is “likely to have negative effects on jobs and economic growth and to deepen the state’s budget crisis.”

“She claims to have a plan that’s very detailed and based on careful research. But it really isn’t careful at all, and it’s misguided,” Reich said. “It has a lot of incorrect assumptions. A lot of studies she draws on are useless or kind of misleading and don’t agree with well-accepted economic research.” Whitman’s plan consists of:

– Tax cuts for wealthy people and businesses — including eliminating the state’s capital gains tax — which would “reduce the state’s economic growth while exacerbating the state’s budget deficit problem.”

– Eliminating climate change regulations, which “could bring positive harm to the environment, would sharply reduce clean-tech venture capital spending in the state, and would reduce employment.”

– Spending cuts that “would have negative consequences on employment.”

Whitman likes to make a big show of her determination to cut spending, stating that “I have identified $15 billion worth of spending cuts that we can go after over a couple of years.” However, the California budget deficit for the coming fiscal year alone stands at $20 billion, and it’s only going to grow if her tax cut plan is implemented.

According to Reich, the state will lose $6-$10 billion in revenue depending on how Whitman implements her tax plan. And her spending plan “does not specify” where most of her proposed budget cuts will fall. But since most of California’s general fund spending is in education, health and human services, and prisons, it stands to reason that those areas would see the most severe budget cutbacks.

A group of 20 California economists signed a letter today stating that “the evidence and theory that Whitman uses to diagnose California’s problems are unscientific and an unsound basis for policy. As a result, her diagnosis and her proposed economic policies are both deeply flawed…If implemented, Whitman’s program would worsen California’s budget malaise and its economic performance.”

Although the House held a one-day session today in order to pass a bill giving $26 billion in badly-needed aid to states, members will be heading right back to their districts to continue talking to voters during the August congressional recess. Last week, as an aid to its conference, the Republican leadership released a 15-page document of advice and talking points to be used over the break.

The document — entitled “Tread Boldly” — decries Washington’s “reckless spending binge” and claims to have answers for issues like high unemployment and rising federal debt. In fact, the tag line of the pamphlet is “solutions, hard work, and no regrets.”

However, the proposed “solutions” are nothing but platitudes. In a front page article in today’s San Francisco Chronicle, Carolyn Lochhead slams the GOP’s deficit reducing ideas, as they wouldn’t actually do anything to reduce the deficit:

Among the ideas for reducing the nation’s $13 trillion debt (mislabeled “deficit” in the pamphlet) is a call to “eliminate unnecessary and duplicative federal programs,” a well-worn bullet point that fails to name any such program. Others, such as canceling what’s left of the bank rescue and President Obama’s stimulus in addition to freezing federal hiring, are slightly more specific but yield sums nowhere near what’s necessary to tame the rising debt.

The document calls for extending $3.1 trillion in expiring Bush administration tax cuts, the vast majority of which Obama and Democratic leaders wholeheartedly embrace, except for the tax cuts for high earners. Defense spending, which has more than doubled since 2001, dwarfing every other budget category, goes unmentioned. The most telling omission is Medicare, the jet engine of U.S. deficits.

Conservative economist and National Review contributor Veronique de Rugy added that “Republicans don’t have a plan” to cut spending. In fact, they don’t have any kind of plan to reduce deficits at all. Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), the House Minority Whip, made that perfectly clear last week when he admitted that extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy would “dig the hole deeper” on the deficit, but supported them anyway.

In fact, just last Friday, Cantor was given multiple chances but couldn’t name a single specific spending cut he would recommend. Before that, MSNBC’s Mike Barnacle begged Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) to “start with just one program you’d cut” to reduce the deficit, but Shadegg couldn’t name one.

If Cantor, Shadegg, and the rest of the House Republicans need some ideas for responsible cuts and revenue boosters, we have them right here. But don’t expect an actual GOP agenda to emerge anytime soon – they wouldn’t want to scoop themselves.

– Charlie Eisenhood

Last month, Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina (R) said, “let me propose something that may seem crazy to you: you don’t need to pay for tax cuts. They pay for themselves, if they are targeted, because they create jobs.” That is, in fact, crazy, but it’s not the only tax bamboozling that Fiorina is trying to pull.

Last week, Fiorina made a two campaign stops — one at Grimmway Farms in Arvin, CA, and another at the Tri-Boro Fruit Company — where she fearmongered about the currently expired estate tax while “flanked by supportive local farmers.” “If we do nothing the death tax will go from 0 percent today to 55 percent on January first,” said Fiorina who favors a full estate tax repeal.

One of the farmers with whom Fiorina appeared is evidently worried that “his children would one day have to sell off property that’s been in the family for generations” were the estate tax to be reinstated. Not knowing anything about that particular farm, it’s hard to say what its potential estate tax liability might be, but the fact is that exceedingly few farmers in the country ever have to pay the estate tax. Fiorina is hiding behind them in order to push a tax cuts that will overwhelmingly benefit the already ultra-wealthy.

President Obama has proposed reinstating the estate tax at the 2009 level of 45 percent with a $3.5 million exemption (so $3.5 million can be handed on entirely tax free). According to estimates by the Tax Policy Center only about 110 small businesses or family farms in the entire country could conceivably be affected by the estate tax at that level. And “virtually none” would have to go through the doomsday scenario of selling off parts of the farm itself in order to pay:

A Congressional Budget Office study found that all but a handful of the farm estates that would owe any tax under the 2009 parameters would have sufficient liquid assets on hand (such as bank accounts, stocks, and bonds) to pay the tax without having to touch the farm or business. And those very few small business and farm estates that might conceivably face a liquidity problem would have other options — such as spreading their payments over a 14-year period — that would allow them to pay the tax without selling off any of the business or farm assets.

In fact, in 2001, when the estate tax was much higher than it was for the rest of the last decade, the American Farm Bureau “could not cite a single example of a farm lost because of estate taxes.” Iowa State University Economist Neil Harl “said he had searched far and wide but had never found a case in which a farm was lost because of estate taxes.” “It’s a myth,” he said.

Currently, almost two-thirds of estate tax revenue comes from estates worth more than $20 million. In addition to benefiting only the super-wealthy, repealing the estate tax entirely would cost $784 billion over ten years.

This past weekend, coal company executives convened for the annual West Virginia Coal Association meeting in White Sulphur Springs, WV. The event, which was closed to the public, was held at the lavish Greenbrier Resort, where an overnight stay can cost upwards of $6,000 (plus tax). One panelist at the meeting, state Senate Finance Chairman Walt Helmick, pointed out the exclusivity of the resort hotel: “I used to drive by the Greenbrier often when I was young, but I never had the money to come in because I’m a former coal miner.”

During the event, over 100 attendees collaborated on issues from hiring industry lobbyists to fighting federal regulations. However, one of the biggest concerns on the minds of coal executives was how to ensure children would be taught an industry-friendly approach to coal issues in the classroom.

During a membership meeting attended by ThinkProgress, attendees took the opportunity to vent about their poor public perception and accused teachers of turning children against them. One coal executive, Jim Bunn, summed up the general sentiment:

BUNN: There’s so much negativity in the classroom, and I really don’t understand that. I can tell you that every industry has negatives throughout. I don’t care what it is. The education system has negatives. We need to get them to understand that we are not Darth Vader, we are good people. We’re just like you in that we come to work every morning.

West Virginia Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin concurred, saying, “I agree with you that those kind of programs could be expanded” because West Virginia children are being unduly influenced by “what they hear on the national news…on how bad coal is.” Coal executives and state legislators continued their mutual admiration for changing the state curriculum to be more pro-industry. A coal executive named Joe proposed the idea of a statewide “Coal Day”:

JOE: There’s a West Virginia labor day recognized in public schools. I think something like that could work in the coal context as well. Pick a day of the year that West Virginia public schools would discuss mining, its concept, its history, its contribution to the state of West Virginia. Food for thought.

STATE SENATE ENERGY, INDUSTRY & MINING CHAIRMAN MIKE GREEN: I remember in the 8th grade getting a lot of information about coal, about the history of coal. Is that still being done?

UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Actually, it’s just the opposite. They get taught how bad coal is in our schools.

Some at the meeting weren’t satisfied with just a single day devoted to coal. A coal executive named Michael went further, proposing an entire week of coal-friendly lessons for kids:

MICHAEL: Is there a way for the legislature to have a course ‘natural resource week,’ where coal, natural gas, other topics can be taught? We have national history week in this country, everybody creates a national week of something. Is there a way to create a standards of learning that the legislature would passed that the activists could not keep out of the schools so we could get that education across?”

GREEN: I think we should. I think that’s a great idea. I think we need to check with our colleagues in Virginia and see if we can get that done. I don’t think my colleagues disagree with that, do you? [All shook their heads in agreement.]

The coal industry has indeed made headway in altering West Virginia’s classrooms. In October 2009, the Raleigh County school board approved “a pro-coal curriculum designed by retired teachers and the Friends of Coal Ladies Auxiliary.” As part of the curriculum, fourth-graders at Stratton Elementary were taken on a field trip to the Beckley Exhibition Coal Mine where each student was given “a coloring book, compliments of the auxiliary, illustrating how coal is mined and how it is burned for energy.”

One of the groups that has made significant progress enacting a pro-coal curriculum is Friends of Coal, the coal industry group that sponsored the Greenbrier retreat. Its education affiliate, CEDAR (Coal Education Development and Resource of Southern West Virginia, Inc.), is a “partnership between the coal industry, business community and educators.” Its stated mission is “to facilitate the increase of knowledge and understanding of the many benefits the coal industry provides in daily lives by providing financial resources and coal education materials to implement its study in the school curriculum.”

With coal industry executives united in this effort, and state legislators working on their behalf to implement such changes, West Virginia’s revisionist education curriculum may soon put even Texas to shame.

The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, and President Obama, just as he did on the campaign trail, has proposed renewing the cuts for all but those in the highest two income tax brackets, allowing tax rates for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to reset to the rate at which they were under President Clinton.

Republicans, however, want to renew all of the cuts, and have been apoplectic about Obama’s plan, claiming that it will kill jobs and cripple small businesses. “This is about stopping a job-killing tax hike on small businesses during tough economic times,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). “You can’t raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy without risking a double dip in the recession,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).

If these warnings about double-dip recessions and job-killing tax increases sound vaguely familiar, that’s because they are. TaxVox yesterday pointed to a couple of quotes from Republicans in 1993 employing very similar rhetoric as today’s Republicans, with then Senate Minority leader Bob Dole (R-KS), claiming that “half the tax increase because of the rate increases is going to be paid by small business and they’re not rich,” which is the same false argument employed by today’s Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Here is just some of the rhetoric employed by Republicans in 1993 to fearmonger about Clinton’s tax increases (there’s more below the fold):

Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bill Archer (R-TX), May 24, 1993: I would much rather be here today supporting the President and I would do so if his proposals could expect to increase jobs and the standard of living for Americans, but I believe his massive tax increases will do just the opposite. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-GA), July 13, 1993: Small businesses generate the bulk of this Nation’s new jobs. And they will be the hardest hit by the Clinton tax-and-spend budget. Because, when you raise taxes, you kill jobs. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA), May, 27, 1993: This is really the Dr. Kevorkian plan for our economy. It will kill jobs, kill businesses, and yes, kill even the higher tax revenues that these suicidal tax increasers hope to gain. (Congressional Record, 1993, Page: H2949)

Of course, far from bringing the Doomsday of which Republicans were warning, Clinton’s policies ushered in the longest sustained period of economic growth in the nation’s history, with 23 million jobs created. Compared to the administration of George W. Bush, the Clinton-era saw more job growth, more GDP growth, more wage growth, and more business investment. Incomes grew under Clinton but fell under Bush, while poverty did the opposite, falling under Clinton but increasing under Bush.

Oh, and Clinton balanced the budget for the first time since 1969. On May 27, 1993, Rep. Robert Michel (R-IL) said “[Americans] will remember who set loose this dreadful virus into the economic bloodstream of our nation.” If only we could have a “dreadful virus” of that sort today. More quotes below the jump. Read more