Pretty much. The current setup implies that a fund manager's income is the result of capital gains from invested assets. The argument to eliminate the loophole, for lack of a better term, is based on the idea that the fund manager's income is essentially a commission... labor income for his services managing the portfolio.
Right and wrong. Yes, part of the impact is offset by lower marginal rates on ordinary income, but the net impact is still revenue-positive (i.e. the hedge fund guys are paying more).
One thing that often gets lost in all this is that "hedge fund managers" can be a pretty nasty anti-Semitic dog whistle.
You can't say "fund managers, etc." so dismissively like that. The group to which carried interest applies is a very small percentage of financial professionals. Carried interest applies only to "general partners of private equity, venture capital, real estate, hedge funds and other investment vehicles organized as limited partnerships." Most people who fall into the category of "fund managers, etc." have nothing to do with carried interest.