As the presidential candidates try to impress American voters, the images projected by the nation’s two major political parties could lead people to believe that the Republicans and the Democrats are edging ever closer on the issues.
For the Republicans, “compassionate conservatism” has become a mantra. The Democrats, now the party of welfare reform, have a draft national platform that gets tough on bad teachers, criminals and national security threats. From all appearances, the two parties almost seem destined to blur into a single party somewhere in the middle of the road.
But as detailed national platforms drafted in the past few days by each party reveal, real differences remain. Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore represent starkly contrasting views on many of the issues most important to voters, from abortion to guns, taxes to education.
If there’s a perception that both candidates are saying the same things, there may be a good, practical reason: More than ever, politicians rely on opinion polls and focus groups to learn which themes, images and words voters want to hear.
Poll results in hand, the politicians end up adopting the same appealing, popular language to describe vastly different proposals.
“Some see this year as tweedledee and tweedledum because the campaign themes each candidate is using sound the same: Strengthening Social Security, improving education, reducing taxes,” said Lawrence Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota.
“If you were just tuning in and you picked up the stump speech, you’d think these guys are talking about doing the same things. But … I would say there are more differences on the major issues between these candidates than we’ve had in decades,” he said.
On some topics–balancing the federal budget and supporting free trade–the two largely agree. But the candidates have conflicting positions and the parties have conflicting planks on key policies.
Bush and Gore are on opposite sides of the abortion debate.
Bush opposes abortion and opposes using federal money to pay for abortions. Still, Bush, who has not embraced an anti-abortion litmus test for his Supreme Court nominees, has expressed a slightly different view from his party’s platform. Though Bush has indicated support for exceptions in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother, the Republicans’ platform, approved on Monday, offers none:
“The unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed,” it states.
Gore says he considers abortion a “fundamental” right, as does his party’s draft platform, which will be approved when the Democrats begin meeting in Los Angeles on Aug. 14.
Gore’s stance on abortion has shifted during his years in public life. When he served in Congress representing Tennessee in the 1970s and 1980s, he cast votes against federal funds for abortions, but he has since supported such funding.
Both Gore and Bush have described education as a crucial piece of their candidacies. And each has differing proposals: Bush supports federal vouchers so some parents of public school students can send their children to private schools. Gore opposes vouchers.
Their philosophies on how to improve schools also differ. Bush hopes to create a federal fund of $500 million for states in which students show signs of improved academic work. In public schools that fail to improve, Bush would hand out $1,500 annual scholarships to children–apparently to be used to get extra help or academic training. And, in states where test scores don’t get better, 5 percent of federal education funds would be shifted to charter schools under the Bush plan.
In the Democrats’ get-tough party plank on education, Gore calls for more testing of teachers and the closure of schools that don’t improve. Gore says he would spend $50 billion as part of a larger education spending package to send all 4-year-olds to preschool within the next four years.
The candidates’ plans for Social Security mark another divergence.
Bush wants workers to be allowed to take part of the money they put into the Social Security system and invest it in private accounts with a hope of higher returns. Gore disagrees and wants to keep the current system running, by paying off the debt now and using the interest savings to make up for a projected deficit in the Social Security system.
On taxes, Bush and Gore again choose different directions.
Bush wants to reduce the top four (of the current five) federal income tax rates. That would reduce the top two rates (39.6 percent and 36 percent) to 33 percent. Likewise, two middle rates would drop. Bush would make other changes too: doubling the child credit, phasing out the inheritance tax, and re-instituting a deduction for married couples filing joint tax returns.
Gore also supports tax breaks, but his would be smaller and narrower. Gore’s breaks would be focused on people with particular expenses in areas such as education, health and retirement.
When it comes to health care, both men say they want more Americans covered by insurance. One of Gore’s central aims is to create a new prescription drug benefit under Medicare. Bush, too, wants to create such a benefit, but his would work differently–through subsidies of private insurers.
