you miss my point although supply-sider claim should have been refuted years ago, kennedy's initial proposal to cut taxes was made after white house debate about whether to raise taxes in order to raise revenue to pay for military buildup, what was called fiscal orthodoxy at the time had good bit of support within administration and even more in congress..
heller's so called 'new economics' idea was keynesian, gained traction with kennedy who was concerned about economy's incomplete recovery following third recession in a decade that heller and other advocates attritbuted to eisenhowrr's othodox economic policies...
even kinky, i mean, milton friedman remarked at time that tax cut passed (which, btw, was in 1964, one among number of bills that lbj attached to slain jfk''s memory), that 'we're all keynesians now (don't recall uncle miltie's tone, but he should be remembered for comment that is usually atttributed to nixon some years later)...
as for my point in previous post: senate operates according to what daniel inouye called 'forged compromise' between majority and minority, filibuster and rule 22 thingy, liberal dems have almost always been willing to give up more than republicans to forge such compromises, bleating of conservatives that sky will fall if reps lose congressional majority, what evidence exists to suggest that dems will act differently this time... mh