I previously blogged War and Taxes (Urban Institute Press, 2008), the new book by Steven A. Bank (UCLA), Joseph J. Thorndike (Tax Analysts) & Kirk J. Stark (UCLA).  Today’s Washington Post discusses the book in Billing The Grandkids, by Ruth Marcus:

"This contrast — between an active war effort on one hand and substantial tax cuts on the other — has no precedent in American history," three tax historians explain in "War and Taxes," a new book from the Urban Institute. Rather, since the War of 1812, "special taxes have supported every major military conflict in our nation’s history."

As Steven Bank, Kirk Stark and Joseph Thorndike show, presidents and lawmakers have not always been eager to impose taxes to pay war costs. But historically, Republicans and Democrats alike ultimately acknowledged the necessity — fiscal and moral — of shared sacrifice. "I think the boys in Korea would appreciate it more if we in this country were to pay our own way instead of leaving it for them to pay when they get back," said House Speaker Sam Rayburn.

Until Iraq, that is. "Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes," then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay declared in March 2003.

The authors suggest several reasons for this turnabout. The end of the draft alleviated pressure on those left at home to do their part. A globalized economy and a more skillful Federal Reserve have reduced the fear of rampant inflation that fueled previous wartime tax hikes. Political polarization has driven away moderates, who tend to be deficit hawks.

I’d argue that the biggest factor is the transformation of the Republican Party: This is the first extended war fought under the banner of supply-side economics. …

Here’s the new, bipartisan fiscal policy: Soak the grandchildren. George Washington would have been appalled.