THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, October 2, 1996 TAG: 9610020013
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 78 lines
Running behind, Mark Warner tried mightily to draw distinctions between himself and John Warner in Sunday night's televised debate in Virginia's U.S. Senate race. To a degree, he succeeded, carving out differences on matters from school lunch programs to funding of computers in libraries.
But making a compelling case for ousting a well-positioned, three-term incumbent remains a high hurdle. With five weeks left until Election Day, Mark Warner has not yet cleared that barrier.
Meanwhile, on some fiscal matters neither candidate is being as forthright as we'd like. The public could use more straight talk from the Warners on how they'd balance competing goals, such as saving Medicare from bankruptcy without jeopardizing seniors, or cutting taxes for working families while balancing the budget.
Probably the clearest difference delineated by the debate was John Warner's support of a tax cut for working families vs. Mark Warner's insistence that balancing the budget has to come first. ``We've got to put off the major tax relief until we've got our fiscal house in order,'' said Mark Warner.
We agree. But we'd like more specifics from the junior Warner about just how he'd cut the deficit. And from the senior Warner, we'd like a clearer understanding of how Congress can cut taxes and balance the budget simultaneously.
Mark Warner has said he'd turn the decision-making on budget cuts over to a presidential commission. As John Warner argued, that's a bit too convenient a solution. Touting a commission tells the public little about Mark Warner's personal priorities. Voters need to know them.
During the debate, Mark Warner offered a few glimpses. He'd cut out B-2 bombers and government subsidies to timber and mining industries. But this is pocket change in comparison with $120 billion in annual deficits. Warner doesn't need to tell us chapter and verse on each program he'd slash, but he should tell us if reductions will come from entitlements or defense or somewhere else.
We'd like more clarity from John Warner also. The senior Warner sidestepped the question of whether he supports GOP presidential contendor Bob Dole's massive tax-cut plan, including a 15 percent across-the-board cut in income taxes.
He won't latch on to anyone else's tax ideas, John Warner said. He'll pursue his own. Fine. But what are they? Does the senator favor a 5 percent cut in income taxes? Ten percent? Twenty percent? During the debate, John Warner said he'd aim tax relief at working families - not millionaires such as himself or multimillionaires such as his opponent. Fine, again. But, specifically, what families are we talking about? Those that earn less than $100,000? Less than $50,000? $30,000?
Voters can't calculate the costs unless they know the plan. So far John Warner has failed to explain how a balanced budget can be achieved while cutting taxes. Offsetting spending cuts will be needed. Big ones. From where?
Aside from fiscal matters, both men reiterated support for a strong defense and an improved educational system. That's good. Still, some differences exist.
Clearly, the senator, as second-ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, knows more about weapons systems and national security than his opponent.
As a technological whiz-kid, Mark Warner was on safer ground when it came to talking about the future of computers.
Mark Warner's attention to the technological needs of schools is laudable. But even he is not addressing what is likely to be the greatest gap in computer access - not that between poor and rich school districts, but that between well-off and impoverished households.
With a group of citizens leading the questioning, much of Sunday's debate focused on leadership skills and voter disillusionment with politics.
John Warner once again displayed the independent spirit that has endeared him to nonpartisan voters. Those who would abolish the Department of Education ``I think in a way are extremist,'' he said. The senator did not duck the fact that most of those ``extremists'' are in his own party.
Mark Warner offered his experience in running a successful business and in creating health-care coverage for the working poor as major achievements.
Both Warners have more than met the threshold tests of leadership in their personal and professional lives. What we could use in the next few weeks is less focus on such broad generalities and more focus on the details - particularly as they relate to handling the federal government's budgetary woes. by CNB