(3 of 3)
Gore had a similar reason for touting what is by any measure a serious tax cut: he needed to react to Bush. That political reality is apparent to voters, and may be one reason many people aren't tuning into this debate. "He's got to cave in and respond to all of Bush's tax-cut talk," says Howard Richards, 68, a retired real estate broker who turned up last week at a Gore tax event in Florida. Another reason is that Gore knows Democrats argue against tax cuts at their peril. Gore's side "spent 20 years getting hammered about the head by Republicans for being the party of tax-and-spend," says Aaron of the Brookings Institution. "They're not going to let that happen to them again."
Gore has not abandoned all his Democratic tendencies. He makes up for his smaller tax cut with gigantic spending proposals like a proposed increase in child health-care coverage and a prescription-drug benefit under Medicare. Ultimately, Gore would spend about as much of the surplus as Bush. The only difference would be where the money goes. Once either set of proposals was in place, it would be no easier to scale back Gore's prescription-drug entitlement than to reverse Bush's tax cut. Says Reischauer: "Why should today's policymakers dissipate tomorrow's possible surpluses?"
Both candidates have promised to keep talking tax cuts right into November. After that, reality will set in, no matter who wins. No President can wave a wand and change the tax code. As Representative Ray LaHood, the Illinois Republican, noted after introducing Bush at a rally in Peoria last week, "Congress will have some say about it." Whether or not Republicans retain their majority, it's unlikely that a sharply divided House and Senate would pass either plan in its current form. But don't tell Bush and Gore that; they're having too much fun jumping hip deep into piles of make-believe money.
Reported by James Carney, with Bush, Viveca Novak/Washington and Tim Padgett/Tamarac, Fla.