Spending cuts first
Not only is the ratio of spending cuts to tax increases an unacceptable 1:1 at best in the Democrat proposals, but we all know most of the spending cuts would never actually happen. We've been down this road before. It's something the Republicans should hammer much harder than they do.
Serious question, not meant as partisan snark at all: Why not do the spending cuts first, for the very first time in modern history, and see where that gets us before we talk about tax increases at all? Not only is that consistent with the vast majority of the current debt coming from excessive spending, but it's consistent with the established history of the standard "Wimpy" deal in D.C.: "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."
Follow-up serious question: If it was cool for Obama to pile on trillions in debt with useless "stimulus" spending, but we now know the only thing that offered any real stimulus at all was a badly-constructed temporary payroll tax cut, wouldn't it make sense to risk a bit more debt accumulation with big pro-growth tax cuts? If the proven Laffer Curve performs as conservatives know it will, the actual loss of revenue to the Treasury will be minimal, or the Treasury will end up with even more revenue. And if the worst fears of static-analysis Big Government acolytes prove true, the deficit goes up, but we really do get jobs and economic recovery... putting us in a much better position to survive their tax-raising nostrums later, if it comes to that.