> When the federal government gives high tax states tax cuts, that means those areas give less to the federal government, meaning those generally rich states end up getting federally subsidized by the poorer states.

Except those generally rich states are, in fact, currently net federal tax subsidizers of the rest of the country; this tax reform will actually reduce that because the rich people who are concentrated on those states will get huge tax cuts, whereas poorer people in the rest of the country will get big tax increases.

> Shouldn't the richer areas help pay for the poor?

So, what you are saying is we shouldn't adopt a tax “reform” that massively reduces progressivity transferring tax burden from the rich too the poor?

If so, on that much we agree.