Grover Norquist defends tax cuts.

In 1985, Grover Norquist founded Americans for Tax Reform at the request of then-President Ronald Reagan. Since then, Norquist has become perhaps the nation’s best known anti-tax crusader, persuading hundreds of elected officials from Congress to state legislatures to local governments to sign a pledge vowing to oppose any tax increases. In a recent Editorial Board interview, he defended the tax cut passed last month by congressional Republicans and signed into law by President Trump. For a video of the complete interview, go to OrlandoSentinel.com/Opinion

Q: Are you pleased with the tax bill — or more important, do you think Americans should be pleased with the bill?

A: The bill is a very important first start. It is going to be very helpful to economic growth; there’s more to be done, but it’s a great first start. When the bill passed, it actually was unpopular because its critics had said many things about it that were less than true. Now that we’re three weeks in, it’s gotten 10 percent more popular and 10 percent less unpopular just as people are beginning to understand what’s in it, but that will continue throughout the year. People ... haven’t even yet seen the change in their paychecks, but 80 percent of Americans will see a clear tax reduction probably starting their first paycheck in February, and between now and the next election every two weeks everyone will be reminded of that. And then, of course, for the half of the country that has a 401(k) or an IRA or defined-contribution pension — and certainly other people have relatives, friends, fathers, sons, daughters who do — they will see the value of their life savings continue to go up as people react to the lower taxes and the economy continues to strengthen.

Q: The most generous analysis of the bill has estimated it will add $500 billion to the deficit over the next decade. Some credible estimates have pegged the cost at over $2 trillion. Won’t this make a bad debt problem even worse?

A: During the Obama years we added about $10 trillion, doubled the debt, and we had the weakest economic recovery that we’ve had since World War II. So we had a lot of debt and nothing to show for it in terms of growth. … One of the things the Congressional Budget Office points out is that if you grow at 3 percent a year, which is less than American historic levels, versus 2 percent a year, which was what Obama did for a decade ... you add $2.7 trillion in revenue to the government. So if you simply grow at, say, less than half a point more — go from just under 2 percent to 2.3 percent — that more than pays for the static analysis [cost] of $1.5 trillion. We’re already over 3 percent over the last six months in terms of growth . ... we’re looking at strong economic growth that also brings in more revenue to the government. But my major interest is in jobs for the American people and higher wages for the American people, and I don’t consider a tax cut to be a cost; I consider a tax cut to be a pay increase for the American people.

Q: The tax bill also relies on gimmicks to hold down its 10-year impact on the budget like sunsetting the individual tax cuts in 2025. So why should Americans trust a piece of legislation that resorts to gimmicks?

A: … I believe that we will see growth so strong as a result that [the individual tax cuts] will clearly be re-upped and even Democrats will have to vote for it. Then, some of these [provisions] you have to first do them and let the economy demonstrate how important it is. … The Democrats didn’t take back the Bush tax cuts that they voted against; they voted to make them permanent. This will happen again.

Q: The Tax Policy Center says households earning $20,000 or less will receive an average tax cut of $60, and those with incomes greater than $3.4 million will receive an average tax cut of $193,000. How is this fair?

A: … Every American citizen who pays taxes, income taxes, federal income taxes, will see a lower marginal tax rate … Eighty percent, even according to one of the left-wing groups — perhaps the one you said — will clearly get a tax cut and the other 10 percent to 13 percent it will roughly be the same. … And half of Americans have a 401(k) [or] IRA, defined contribution, pension system, and so they directly own stock. … They have all seen the value of their life savings increase dramatically in the last year, because of the tax cuts coming.

Q: With unemployment low, and the stock market at record highs, is this a good time for a deficit-financed tax cut? Aren’t we at risk of fueling inflation?

A: No. The economy has been growing at an average of less than 2 percent a year for the last eight years. That sucks — that is lousy by American standards. … We cut taxes under Reagan, we went to 4 percent growth, and we took inflation down from 13 percent to 2 percent. … And now we’re seeing the economy pick up from 2 percent growth to 3 percent, and I think it will strengthen from there.

Q: You referred to this tax bill as a good start. If you were king for a day in Washington, what’s the next step you’d take on tax-related legislation?

A: ... By executive order the Treasury secretary could ... index the basis for capital gains to inflation, which means that if you bought a house years ago or land years ago or stock years ago, or a company had bought any of those things, right now you pay a capital gains tax on — you bought it for a hundred and now you’re selling it for a thousand, you pay capital gains on $900. Maybe half of that was inflation. This executive order would take the inflation gains out and you’d just pay capital gains on the real gain, not the inflation gains. … That would be a tremendous reduction in the penalty we have on people when they sell a house, a farm, business, or when businesses try and re-allocate their assets and have to sell stuff off. …

I don’t consider a tax cut to be a cost; I consider a tax cut to be a pay increase for the American people.