Gingrich: "The Return of the Liberal Tax Increase"

Starting on April 24 of last year, Newt has written a weekly newsletter for Human Events. The Speaker covers a wide-range of topics in it, from the War on Terror to the economy.

In his latest one, titled "The Return of the Liberal Tax Increase," Newt detailed how much more the "average" American citizen would pay under the House Democrat's plan. Far from "taxing the rich," the bill would hurt married couples, couples with kids, and small business owners.

By Newt denouncing the proposed-tax increase, it is yet another opportunity to bring up the stark differences between Speaker Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and John McCain:

In 1988, Giuliani opposed President Bush's "no-tax pledge," which, of course, Bush broke.

In 1994, Romney criticized the supply-side economics of Reagan's.

In 2001 and 2003, McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts.

Gingrich, on the other hand, has long supported tax-cuts -- even opposing Reagan's 1982 tax increase on businesses and excise taxes, as well as the broken-pledge of Bush 41.

Reagan's '82 tax increase, a year after his historic income tax reduction, was part of a deal with Congressional Democrats: for every dollar that taxes were hiked, the Democrats promised three dollars of spending cuts; the cuts never happened, of course. To his credit, however, Reagan made sure that taxes were not hiked on individuals. Still, the deal was bad enough that Reagan Attorney General Ed Meese -- who Giuliani thinks is a sleaze -- calls it "the greatest domestic error of the Reagan administration."

To go up against one of his heroes when he had just 3-plus years in Congress on such an important issue as taxation shows Gingrich's principle.

So did dissenting on Bush's tax increase -- which taxed income, unlike Reagan's. Even though it would appear easier to oppose the Bush hike -- after all, the move was overwhelmingly unpopular and Gingrich had now served almost 12 years -- it was tough for one reason: Newt was the number two Republican in the house. As part of the leadership, he was expected to fall in line. But at the Rose Garden signing ceremony, he pledged to vote against it and felt it would not pass -- "astound[ing] everyone, especially White House aides," writes conservative historian Lee Edwards in The Conservative Revolution. "He was speaking not just for himself but for conservatives in and out of the administration."