These changes came about as part of the Trump administration & Republican efforts to reduce taxation. Because you can't trivially just cut taxes (as was done in 2017) without showing how you will either make up the missing revenue or reduce spending, they threw in a time-deferred measure - the new Section 174 that "demonstrated" how the tax cuts in 2017 would be paid for in the future. It was all sleight of hand, but what's new?

Republicans have been talking about shrinking the size of the federal government for decades. They routinely fail to come up with substantive cuts in spending that would not set off a disaster for them at the polls, or for the country economically, or both.

There is this perception that the federal is full of wasteful spending, but this perception is false (there is waste, it's not a large percentage of the huge overall federal budget). This means that to actually cut the revenue needed will require truly substantive cuts to the services provided and performed by the federal government.

Maybe you could be more successful at proposing what those cuts would be than any Republican has for 50 years, but it seems unlikely.