You've heard it from liberals a million times:  the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which resuscitated America's economy following the 2000-2001 Clinton/Gore recession, were "tax cuts for the rich," and that "the rich don't pay their fair share in America."  Reality is quite different. 

Chalk up another liberal myth left in shambles, alongside the "stolen" 2000 Florida election, Joe Wilson's bizarre "Plamegate" self-destruction, claims that missile-defense would spark another arms race with Russia and cries that welfare reform would destroy America's working class. 

One can understand liberals' desperation, of course, since every other one of their claims against tax cuts has failed. 

First, liberals screeched that the tax cuts would starve the federal government of revenues critical to maintaining their pet bureaucracies.  Unfortunately for them, the tax cuts actually increased incoming federal revenues by sparking economic growth. 

This duplicates the lessons learned from the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan's supply-side tax cuts increased federal revenues 27% between 1980 and 1989, according to OMB data.   Economist Arthur Laffer, who created the Laffer Curve by asserting that tax cuts increase federal revenues by stimulating economic growth, should take a well-deserved bow.  Regardless, the lesson is the same in 2006 as it was in the 1980s – tax cuts spur economic growth and increase incoming revenues. 

Faced with this reality, liberals next claimed that the tax cuts were failing to spur employment growth or create jobs.  Remember when they mocked the 2004 White House prediction of 2 million new jobs that year?  Lo and behold, the White House prediction actually underestimated 2004 job creation by 10%.  Gross Domestic Product has grown approximately 4% for over three years now, well above the historical 3.2% GDP growth average.  As a consequence, the unemployment rate stands at 4.7%, which is lower than the average unemployment rate for the 1970s, 1980s and, believe it or not, the media-celebrated 1990s. 

Exhausted of arguments against tax cuts, liberals retreat to their old, trusty standby:  class warfare.  According to them, tax cuts were "for the rich," and wealthy Americans "don't pay their fair share." 

There's just one problem:  the opposite is actually true.  Wealthy Americans actually pay more than their fair share of the nation's taxes. 

As reported by the Wall Street Journal, upcoming I.R.S. statistics reveal American tax realities, and liberals once again have egg on their faces.  In 2004, Americans in the top 1% income bracket earned 19% of the nation's income, but paid 36.9% of the nation's federal taxes, according to that analysis. 

Similarly, the top 0.1% of Americans earned 9.1% of the nation's income, yet paid some 17.4% of the nation's federal taxes.  Further down the brackets, the top 5% of American earners earned 33.4% of the nation's income, but paid a remarkable 57.1% of the nation's federal taxes, according to the report. 

In contrast, the entire bottom 50% of income-earners (those with incomes below $44,389) brought in 13.4% of the nation's income, but paid only 3.3% of the nation's federal taxes.  Indeed, the majority of American families earning under $40,000 actually pay no income tax at all, and many also receive a subsidy in the form of the Earned Income Tax Credit. 

Furthermore, the IRS data obliterates the media-fueled myth that wealthy Americans earn a greater portion of the income pie since President Clinton left office.  During President Clinton's tenure, the portion of national income earned by the wealthiest 1% of Americans reached a post-World War II high of 20.8% in 2000, up from 13.8% when he entered the White House in 1993.  During the Bush Administration, in contrast, the wealthiest 1% of Americans have seen their portion of income drop to 19%.  Similarly, the top 0.1% of Americans saw their share of national income fall from 18.9% in 2000 to 17.4% in 2004. 

We're not necessarily attacking a "progressive" income tax system.  We'll debate that another day. 

But the bottom line is that the next time that liberals or the mainstream media resort to class-warfare and claim that "the rich" aren't carrying their fair share in America, inform them that the opposite is true.