Yet Reagan's tax cuts were reversed.
Tax hikes don't always generate less revenue either. It depends on a lot of factors. A 40% tax rate will surely generate more revenue than a 90% tax rate but it will also generate more revenue than a 1% rate as well.
It is a moot point anyway. The american public just doesn't by the lower taxes equals more revenue.
Were they really? I dont recall how significant Clintons tax hikes were, but Im sure then didnt come near reversing Reagans cuts. X42s increased revenue came from the peace dividend and the tech bubble.
It could be said with equal validity that its a moot point what Americans believe can be achieved from tax hikes. Try it, and revenue goes down. And the more its tried the less ambiguous the correlation becomes.