In the run-up to this weekend's G-8 summit at Camp David, journalists have unfavorably compared European "austerity" with Barack Obama's economic policies.

One White House proposal deserves to be considered by policy makers in both parties who are looking for ways to improve the tax code.

The consequences for health spending and federal revenues of an above-the-line deduction for out-of-pocket health spending can be specified as a function of behavioral parameters.

The average American would believe that the nation's need for substantial nuclear fuel, oil, natural gas, and coal will soon be a distant memory, based on the Obama administration's strident emphasis on developing "alternative" energy sources. The reality, however, is quite different.

Karlyn Bowman is a senior fellow and Andrew Rugg is a research assistant at the American Enterprise Institute. The views expressed in this article are the authors' and do not necessarily reflect those of any other person or institution.

In this article, Bowman and Rugg discuss the public's opinion about...

The Obama and Ryan plans have one striking similarity, as neither specifies which tax preferences will be curtailed or eliminated. Each plan will face hard choices when it comes time to spell out the details. Significant base broadening cannot be achieved by eliminating unpopular loopholes.

Tax reform perpetually tops policymakers' lists for ways to grow the economy, but a generation has passed since the last successful effort, the Tax Reform Act of 1986. This is because of a simple political reality-it's hard. But not, I believe, impossible.

Super committee members Sen. Pat Toomey and Rep. Jeb Hensarling are taking flak from some conservatives for proposing a deal including increases in "revenues." But it's worth taking a look at what Toomey and Hensarling actually were talking about. It may not matter now but could after 2012.