Jewish World Review Feb. 12, 2001 / 19 Shevat, 5761
Within the realm of Bush's tax cut
Polly: He's a socialist but he doesn't like people.
Brian: Nor do I, much.
Polly: You're a conservative. You don't have to.
-- From "Getting On" by Alan Bennett
George W. Bush is a conservative who seems -- there is no accounting for taste -- to like people. Which is one reason he has confounded post-Florida predictions by producing a honeymoon. Three weeks into his 208-week term he is deriving momentum, in part, from the contrast between his temperament and the temperaments of his predecessor and the most sulfurous Democrats.
Like a snail leaving a trail of slime on a sidewalk, Bill Clinton in his exquisitely in-character departure -- his pockets bulging, figuratively (or perhaps not) speaking, with spoons -- underscored the question that was central to the election: Did the party that never recoiled from Clinton's comportment deserve a rebuke or another four years?
Bush's supposedly amazing "charm offensive" is nothing more remarkable than a restoration of elemental civility. It has been helped by dissonant vituperation from the departing chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Joe Andrew, who dismisses Bush as a "lousy" president and a "sock puppet" manipulated by the vice president, and from the new chairman, Terry McAuliffe, who says Republicans favor "spilling oil in Alaska" and "putting derricks in Yellowstone Park."
Adolescence, unattractive enough in adolescents, is more so in biological adults, but that of Andrew and McAuliffe is a gift to Bush. And it may be a gift that keeps on giving. The Democratic Party's dominant ideology is victimology: It is the party of those who, feeling put-upon, nurse political identities defined by membership in grievance groups. But pouting is not a program. So let Democrats devote themselves to seething about such hoary Florida fictions as (McAuliffe again) "state police cars" and "roadblocks" suppressing minority voting.
The centerpiece of Bush's program is a $1.6 trillion tax cut over 10 years, a sum less than 1.5 percent of GDP over that period. Relative to the size of the economy, it is half the size of President John Kennedy's and half the size of President Ronald Reagan's. It would cut just less than 5 percent of anticipated revenues.
And that figure is arrived at by static -- hence faulty -- analysis that does not anticipate increased economic growth resulting from the stimulative effect of the cut. Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth notes that static analysis projected that the 1997 cut in the capital gains rate from 28 percent to 20 percent would reduce tax collections by $50 billion over five years. But already capital gains tax receipts have increased by more than $100 billion. So it is reasonable to project that the revenue decrease from Bush's cut would be less than $1.6 trillion -- probably, Moore says, no more than 4 percent of revenues over the 10 years.
Small wonder Democrats are moving Bush's way. During the campaign Al Gore endorsed first a $250 billion cut, then one of $500 billion. Now some Democrats endorse devoting one-third of the surplus -- minus the Social Security surplus -- to retiring the national debt, one-third to new spending and one-third to tax cuts. They are endorsing a $1 trillion cut -- plus a staggering $1 trillion of new spending. Plus the substantial additional debt reduction resulting from preserving the Social Security surplus. Clearly we are well within the realm Bush wants to operate in, the realm not of clashing principles but of splittable differences.
It has been widely reported that by 2000, half of American households owned stocks. It has been less remarked -- but is not surprising, given the 50 percent voter turnout -- that 70 percent of those who voted own stocks. They are not feeling as flush today as they felt a year ago when Bush's tax-cut proposal failed to strike the sort of sparks he wanted.
Julie Hirschfeld of Congressional Quarterly notes that until Jan. 20, only 35 percent of all members of the House of Representatives had served when somebody other than Clinton was president. The 65 percent elected in or since 1992 have never served during a recession, and many of these members have known surpluses for more years than they knew deficits.
The surplus is beginning to seem normal -- something to be partly disbursed, not hoarded like the White House silver (or what remains of it). And now there is a normal president, who understands three things:
Last year's federal, state and local surpluses exceeded $300 billion -- a 3 percent of GDP drag on the economy. Elementary political morality rejects protracted overtaxation. And Republican appropriators led last autumn's $50 billion spending spree, which foreshadowed the real alternative to Bush's tax
Comment on JWR contributor George Will's column by clicking here.
02/08/01: A season spoiled
02/05/01: Keeping faith behind initiatives
02/01/01: Tall order for a few federal dollars
01/29/01: You ain't seen nothin' yet
01/26/01: 'Art' Unburdened by Excellence
01/22/01: The monkey that could mean the end
01/19/01: The real enemy in the drug war
01/15/01: Congress just isn't big enough
01/12/01: Clinton's mark
01/08/01: All that is jazz
01/04/01: Bush's picks reveal Right attitude
01/02/01: Prosperity in perspective
12/28/00: Soft landing in a spoiled nation
12/26/00: When laws replace common sense
12/21/00: Beware the 'Bipartisanship'
12/18/00: ... A Brief Moment
12/13/00: Judicial activism on trial
12/11/00: Truth optional
12/06/00: A Chastened Court
12/01/00: Counting on some slippery language
11/28/00: Florida's rogue court
11/27/00: This willful court
11/22/00: Ferocity gap
11/17/00: Slow-motion larceny
11/13/00: Gore, Hungry for Power
11/09/00: No, the System Worked
11/06/00: The case for Bush
11/03/00: The Framers' Electoral wisdom
10/30/00: Political astronomy
10/27/00: Candidates condescending
10/23/00: No Partners For Peace
10/20/00: Talking peace with thugs
10/11/00: A feast of retreats
10/10/00: .. And what's gotten into the Danes?
10/05/00: The Agony of Debate
10/02/00: Senate Canvas
09/28/00: Milosevic: Not Another Saddam
09/25/00: Blaming the Voters
09/22/00: Saying No to the Euro
09/18/00: Farewell, Mr. Moynihan
09/14/00: When 'Choice' Rules
09/12/00: Colombia Illusions
09/08/00: Will He Spend It All?
09/04/00: Back in the U.S.S.R.
08/31/00: Stonewalling School Reform
08/28/00: Uphill for a California Republican
08/24/00: Sauerkraut Ice Cream
08/21/00: The Partial-Birth Censors
08/18/00: A Party to Prosperity
08/14/00: The National Scold on the Stump
08/10/00: The Thinking Person's Choice
08/07/00: The GOP of Powell And Rice
08/03/00: Panic in the Gore Camp
07/27/00: . . . Both Radical and Reassuring
07/06/00: Harry Potter: A Wizard's Return
07/03/00: Recalling the Revolution
06/29/00: An Act of Judicial Infamy
06/26/00: Life, Liberty and ... the Pursuit of Foxes
06/21/00: Fumble on Prayer
06/19/00: The unified field theory of culture
06/15/00: Schools Beset by Lawyers And Shrinks
06/12/00: Missile Defense Charade
06/07/00: The Grandparent Dissent
06/05/00: Liberal Condescension
06/01/00: Great Awakenings
05/30/00: Suddenly Social Security
05/25/00: Forget Values, Let's Talk Virtues
05/22/00: AlGore the Hysteric
05/15/00: Majestic Avenue
05/11/00: Just How Irrational Is the Exuberance?
05/08/00: Home-Run Glut
05/04/00: A Lesson Plan for Gore
05/01/00: The Hijacking of the Primaries
04/28/00: The Raid in Little Havana
04/24/00: Tinkering Again
04/17/00: A Judgment Against Hate
04/13/00: Tech- Stock Joy Ride
04/10/00: What the bobos are buying
04/06/00: A must-read horror book
04/03/00: 'Improving' the Bill of Rights
03/30/00: Sleaze, The Sequel
03/27/00: How new 'rights' will destroy freedom
03/23/00: Death and the Liveliest Writing
03/20/00: Powell is Dubyah's best bet
03/16/00: Free to Be Politically Intense
03/13/00: Runnin', Gunnin' and Gambling
03/09/00: And Now Back to Republican Business
03/06/00: As the Clock Runs Out on Bradley
03/02/00: Island of Equal Protection
02/28/00: . . . The Right Response
02/24/00: Federal Swelling
02/22/00: Greenspan Tweaks
02/17/00: Crucial Carolina (and Montana and . . .)
02/10/00: McCain's Distortions
02/10/00: The Disciplining of Austria
02/07/00: Free to Speak, Free to Give
02/02/00: Conservatives in a Changing Market
01/31/00: America's true unity day
01/27/00: For the Voter Who Can't Be Bothered
01/25/00: The FBI and the golden age of child pornography
01/20/00: Scruples and Science
01/18/00: Bradley: Better for What Ails Us
01/13/00: O'Brian Rules the Waves
01/10/00: Patron of the boom
01/06/00: In Cactus Jack's Footsteps
01/03/00: The long year
12/31/99: A Stark Perspective On a Radical Century
12/20/99: Soldiers' Snapshots of the Hell They Created
12/16/99: Star-Crossed Banner
12/13/99: Hubert Humphrey Wannabe
12/09/99: Stupidity in Seattle
12/06/99: Bradley's most important vote
12/03/99: Boys will be boys --- or you can always drug 'em
12/01/99: Confidence in the Gore Camp
11/29/99: Busing's End
11/22/99: When We Enjoyed Politics
11/18/99: Ever the Global Gloomster
11/15/99: The Politics of Sanctimony
11/10/99: Risks of Restraining
11/08/99: Willie Brown Besieged
11/04/99: One-House Town
11/01/99: Crack and Cant
10/28/99: Tax Break for the Yachting Class
10/25/99: Ready for The Big Leagues?
10/21/99: Where honor and responsibility still exist
10/18/99: Is Free Speech Only for the Media?
10/14/99: A Beguiling Amateur
10/11/99: Money in Politics: Where's the Problem?
10/08/99: Soft Thinking On Soft Money
© 2000, Washington Post Writer's Group