WASHINGTON — Although Congress has now agreed to a scaled-back version of President Bush's tax plan, the president has clearly had a more difficult time selling a tax cut this year than he did two years ago. Disappearance of the surplus made his job more difficult, certainly. But on the other hand, the economy is in much worse shape, which normally makes Congress highly receptive to anything labeled a "stimulus" program.
Perhaps one reason for the president's problem, one that could dog his efforts to get through the additional cuts he still hopes for, is that his tax program lacks an underlying philosophy. Cutting taxes for the sake of cutting taxes may be enough justification for conservative Republicans, but not for others. They need persuading not only that tax cuts are preferable to deficit reduction but also that each particular tax cut is one we need now.
The White House itself seems uncertain about why it is doing what it is doing. On some days, the plan to eliminate taxes on dividends was sold as a step toward fundamental tax reform and a cure for corporate governance problems. On others, it was promoted as Keynesian pump-priming.
When people are not sure what the administration really believes, its enemies may be able to convince people that political expediency is the driving thrust. Such a perception can be deadly on election day. By contrast, voters are inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to those, like President Reagan, who appear guided by core beliefs -- even if those beliefs aren't shared by the majority.
Look at Bush's generally high marks on foreign policy. In that area, he has deeply held beliefs that fit into a coherent worldview. This worldview -- known as neoconservatism -- has many articulate supporters who have honed their arguments in academic and popular journals for decades. For this reason, even those who disagree with Bush's foreign policy tend to respect his convictions.
Neoconservatives also have a coherent view of economic policy, called supply-side economics. It underlay Reagan's economic policies and would fit with Bush's as well. By bringing supply-side economics back into the foreground, the president could present a more coherent economic policy and better arguments for selling it.