The Aug. 20 editorial “Fuzzy math,” about Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli II’s economic plan, failed to take into account critical factors facing the state.

Mr. Cuccinelli’s plan was developed based on the impact of the sequester. The commonwealth no longer can depend on the same amount of federal spending as in the past. Our tax code has become more complicated, with billions in exemptions and an increasing burden on taxpayers. Government layoffs and furloughs mean job losses in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads, critical regions for our economy.

Given these realities, Mr. Cuccinelli determined that the best course is to index the tax code to inflation, cap spending at inflation plus population growth and decrease the personal and business income tax rates. The Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy said the plan would generate approximately 58,000 jobs, increase investment by $650 million and increase real disposable income by $3.6 billion.

In addition to the spending cap, which covers part of the cost of the tax cuts, the plan creates a small-business tax-relief commission to identify the least economically productive loopholes in the code. Eliminating a few of these will cover the remainder of the tax cuts. To specify loopholes for removal now would disregard the work of the legislative commissions that are reviewing or would review tax preferences and do a disservice to constituents whose voices need to be heard.

Despite all this, I am glad The Post critiqued Mr. Cuccinelli’s plan. Such analysis is impossible when it comes to Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe’s so-called economic plan. There aren’t enough details to scrutinize or debate.

Sandy Liddy Bourne, Alexandria

The writer is policy director of Cuccinelli for Governor.