For some voters, the need for a tax cut is a no-brainer.

        “I think with the economy the way it's grown, and the projected surplus, since we paid into it we ought to get some of it back,” said Robert Schwab of West Chester, a retired engineer. “I'm all for the across-the-board tax cut.”

        Other voters see other, equally logical uses for the budget surplus. “I'm more concerned about the national debt,” said Sue Teegarden, a real estate agent in Alexandria. “I don't think it's that important we have a tax cut.”

        Ms. Teegarden is a part of the answer to one of the great mysteries of this year's presidential campaign: With $2.2 trillion in federal budget surpluses projected through 2010, why aren't the majority of voters getting as excited about tax cuts as Mr. Schwab is?

        Interviews with Greater Cincinnati voters reveal that if any of them want a tax cut, they support Republican George Bush. Supporters of Democrat Al Gore don't necessarily favor his tax cut. In fact, they typically don't favor a tax cut at all, prefer ring to see the budget surpluses invested in education or environmental protection.

INFOGRAPHIC

Comparing the Bush and Gore tax proposals

        In Ohio, “taxes” was cited in September as the most important issue in the campaign by just 10 percent of voters, according to the University of Cincinnati's Ohio Poll. That fell behind health care, education and the economy.

        Nationally, a Pew Research Center voter survey found “a solid majority rejects an across-the-board tax cut. ... Indeed, Mr. Bush is having difficulty selling many members of his own party on the wisdom of that approach.” The priorities: shoring up Social Security and Medicare, and boosting spending for domestic programs.

        “What Gov. Bush is relying on is people remembering the big tax cut in '81. That's a long time ago, politically,” said Clint Stretch, the director of tax policy for the accounting firm Deloitte & Touche. “Some significant chunk of the voting age population was worried about their prom date or their Little League baseball game when the Reagan tax cut was done.”

        He believes voters have heard talk of tax cuts before without result, so they're not getting excited over the campaign debate.

        Republican Brad Bertke of Oakley said a tax cut is an important issue for him, and he feels it's more likely to happen under Mr. Bush than Mr. Gore. “I think if there's surplus, that means the taxpayers have overpaid and it ought to go back,” he said.

        Mr. Bertke, 33, a health-care administrator whose wife is expecting their first child, said he doesn't see a tax cut detracting from efforts to improve education or addressing other social ills. “I think we can do both.”

        James Houston, 28, a recent law school graduate, said he believes he can spend the surplus better than the government can. “It's more beneficial to send the money back to the people who pay the bills,” he said.

        On the other side, “I don't think a tax cut is that vital to keeping this economy going,” said Democrat Gerald Kerns of Loveland, who teaches political science at the University of Dayton. “It'd mean a tremendous reduction in revenue and when you reduce revenue, you'll have to eliminate programs. And some of these programs are important.”

MORE ONLINE

Examine the candidates' stands on Medicare, abortion and education. Go to Cincinnati.com and type "Elections" in the Keyword box at the top of the page.

        Kymberlee R. Bruce-Lewis of Evanston agreed. She said she's tired of homeowners being taxed to address problems such as drug trafficking and education. She said she'd like to see more federal involvement in these local issues. “I'd like to see some of that money invested in restoring the morals and values of our teachers to teach our students,” she said.

        Voters do seem to understand the differences between the two candidates' tax plans. “They are different in the quality of what they are doing,” Mr. Stretch said.

        “Bush's across-the-board (cut) is generally a 10-percent cut, and it will be bigger for some people, smaller for others. If you've got a lot of kids, you're going to do better. ... His concern is income taxes are too high. What should you do about it? You should cut income taxes,” he said.

        “If you've got a real job, there's at least $600 there for you” under Mr. Bush's plan.

        Al Gore “comes at it in a very different way. He says, "Look, there are people out there who need our help. And if you're going to cut taxes, you ought to help those people who need our help,'” Mr. Stretch said.

        Mr. Gore's tax proposal aids people who pay their own medical insurance, or have long-term care needs, or are paying college tuition, or are saving for retirement. “If you have some collection of those things ... then you're going to do real well under the Gore plan,” Mr. Stretch said.

        But “If you're making $150,000, you're not going to get anything, or not very much. If you're single without kids, you're not going to get very much from the Gore plan.”

        Gauging the overall economic impact isn't easy.

        A Merrill Lynch study says the good news is that both candidates follow 10-year Congressional Budget Office projections of economic growth, which are more conservative than even the Federal Reserve expects. If the economy grows a bit faster than the CBO projects, it will generate enough tax revenue to pretty much pay for everything both candidates want.

        But Merrill Lynch also concludes that:

        • Neither plan provides much economic stimulus.

        • Mr. Bush's plan will cost more in the long run than Mr. Gore's.

        • Both candidates underestimate the costs of their plans.

        Through 2010, Mr. Gore proposes $480 billion in tax cuts, $1 trillion in new spending, plus $240 billion in interest cost on debt. That adds up to $1.7 trillion, Merrill Lynch said.

        Mr. Bush, on the other hand, proposes $1.3 trillion in tax cuts, new spending of $470 billion, and — because debt is paid down more slowly than under Mr. Gore's plan — $310 billion in interest costs. That adds up to $2.1 trillion.

        Merrill Lynch economists, however, expect any prescription drug plan to cost twice as much as either candidate figures ($330 billion for Mr. Gore, $160 billion for Mr. Bush).

        Estate tax cuts another issue

Boaters watching Bengals, breaking law
Voters unfazed by tax-cut plans
Police exam draws more candidates
Mild weather returning this week
NAACP chief: Race relations not good
Many in Newport still have no gas
Residents coping with cold
Results of our news poll
SAMPLES: Tablets added for 'education'
New texts at Adams Co. schools
Clermont College gets $11 million makeover
Columbus Day closings
Democrat Hill carving out niche in House
Hamilton schools slow projects with eye on future state grants
Lebanon looks at business park deals
Music lovers just chill
Parks dedicated with $200,000 and much fanfare
You asked for it
Family, community honor slain woman at memorial
Kentucky Digest
Local Digest
Schools to decide booster spending
Suspect fatally shot in struggle
Visa lottery relocates to Ky.