Last week's tax-cut bidding war by Republicans and Democrats has now been replaced by this week's competition for the blue ribbon in reducing federal spending. The switch in emphasis is welcome even if there are grounds for doubting that politicians will find the will or the way to match spending cuts with tax cuts, dollar for dollar.
Perhaps the two great political parties have discovered that the American people know there is no free lunch -- that reductions in government revenue without offsetting slashes in expenditures pile up debts that threaten the nation's future. A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows that the public favors deficit reduction over tax cuts by a margin of 58 to 35 percent.
Of course, the pandering will continue. Republicans will trumpet the tax cuts they promised in Speaker-to-be Newt Gringrich's "Contract with America." President Clinton will counter with his own blandishments under the rubric of a "Middle Class Bill of Rights." But it was a little reassuring to observe House Republican congressional leaders proclaiming over the weekend that they would slash spending first and than "bank" these savings before passing tax-cut legislation. It was also nice of Mr. Clinton to trot out Vice President Al Gore to outline added billion-dollar efficiencies he envisages in his "Reinventing Government" crusade.
When the White House first assigned this chore to Mr. Gore, it was a consolation prize. The administration's No. 1 priority goal went to First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, who proceeded to construct an elaborate big-government superstructure for reforming health care financing that collapsed of its own weight. Now the White House is counting on the vice president to give the Clinton plan credibility.
That could be a hard job. Even after Mr. Gore described how five government agencies propose to cut costs by $24 billion, another $54 billion in ostensible savings remained lost in the limbo of extending the cap on discretionary spending in faraway fiscal years 1999 and 2000. By the same token, House Republican leaders were big on promises but short on specifics when they vowed to put spending cuts before tax cuts.
Bob Packwood, prospective chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, reflected doubts in GOP Senate ranks about the plunge-ahead attitude of House Republicans. Noting the mistakes of the 1980s, he said: "I'm not going to support any tax cuts that are going to widen the deficit, period. I just don't want to see us once again send out tax cuts with a lick and a promise and hope that the spending cuts are coming later."
The fact is, as most liberal and conservative economists agree, there is no justification for major tax reductions in the midst of a strong recovery. How much better it would be if both parties put all their stress this year on reducing government spending and held off any tax relief until a turn in the business cycle justifies such a move.