Invokes Familiar Anti-Government Theme : Reagan Accents the Positive in Outlining Cuts in Budget

President Reagan, assessing the state of the union at a time when seemingly uncontrollable federal deficits cast a disquieting shadow over the nation’s economic future, Wednesday night charted a course for his second term that ultimately would impose significant new burdens on millions of Americans.

Yet Reagan’s address, far from proclaiming a nation in crisis or calling for steely sacrifice, was an exuberant celebration of boundless hopes and a paean to the liberating virtues of private initiative unfettered by government.

“Four years ago, we began to change--forever, I hope--our assumptions about government and its place in our lives. Out of that change has come great and robust growth--in our confidence, our economy and our role in the world,” the President said, adding:

“Our progress began not in Washington, D.C., but in the hearts of our families, communities, workplaces and voluntary groups which, together, unleashed the invincible spirit of one great nation under God. . . . My fellow citizens, this nation is poised for greatness.”

It was an approach all his own to one of the most difficult challenges any political leader can face in a democratic society: persuading his fellow citizens to accept sacrifices today in the interest of a better tomorrow.

In terms of specific policies, Reagan’s strategy for dealing with the towering federal deficits that many economists see as the nation’s greatest domestic problem is to seek drastic new budget cuts and then rely on levels of economic growth that few experts believe can be sustained long enough to solve the problem.

Yet instead of proclaiming a nation in crisis or dwelling on what his new budget cutting proposals would cost many of his middle-class supporters, Reagan relied on the deeply ingrained instincts that have shaped his leadership in the White House and contributed to his success so far--his fierce mistrust of government and his buoyant positivism.

“We honor the giants of our history not by going back but forward to the dreams their vision foresaw,” he declared. “My fellow citizens, this nation is poised for greatness.”

Mastery of Intangibles

As he often has in confounding his opponents, Reagan displayed his mastery of the intangibles of political stagecraft--from his plucking of two more American heroes from the audience to the “Happy Birthday” serenade launched by senators and congressmen for a President who turned 74 Wednesday.

And the thrust of his speech was all the more striking because, viewed separately, the two elements of Reagan’s approach--his optimistic pronouncements and his anti-government stance--seemed to argue against him. The President, in effect, asked Americans to tighten their belts when they live in a land which he characteristically depicted as almost overflowing with milk and honey. And he asked citizens to put their faith in a chief executive who condemns the very government he has headed for four years.

Yet the political chemistry of this combination has served Reagan well and may prove to be the most practical approach available to him under the circumstances.

“Reagan doesn’t talk about sacrifice,” pointed out Democratic pollster Harrison Hickman, who--like many others in his party--views Reagan’s leadership style with grudging admiration. “He talks about running against the government.”

Task Rivals Roosevelt’s

In one sense Reagan faces a task which rivals that faced by his political hero, Franklin D. Roosevelt, when he took office in the depths of the Depression. The nation Roosevelt led had nowhere to go but up; the economic collapse already had imposed terrible sacrifices on most citizens and few of them had much more to lose.

In Reagan’s America, on the other hand, millions of Americans have a great deal they don’t want to surrender, including the helping hand they receive from the government in many areas of national life. And the spending cuts proposed in Reagan’s new budget strike at benefits that many middle-class Americans have come to take for granted. “It takes the pain of budget cutting directly to Middle America,” warned House Speaker Thomas P. (Tip) O’Neill Jr., the highest ranking elected spokesman of the Democratic opposition.

Indeed, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, head of the Moral Majority, remarked on the eve of the State of the Union speech that it was just as well that neither Reagan nor O’Neill intend to seek office again, because--if together they take the action needed to reduce the deficit--”both would be unelectable.”

But Reagan on Wednesday night left such dire forecasts to Falwell and stressed his own irrepressible optimism, which seems if anything to have been bolstered by his experience in the White House. This is the President who told Congress in 1981, when the country was heading into the worst recession since the Great Depression: “There is nothing wrong with America that we can’t fix.”

‘Industrial Giant Reborn’

And in the America of 1985, for the present anyhow, it is relatively easy for Reagan to find empirical economic evidence to support his confidence. “We did what we promised,” the President proudly declared of his first four years, “and a great industrial giant is reborn.”

Reagan left it to O’Neill and other opposition leaders to talk about the pain of his proposed cuts. The only pain on his horizon would come from increases in taxes, which he opposes. And the pain, which already has been inflicted by the long arm of government, once again he has pledged to restrain.

“There are no constraints on the human mind, no walls around the human spirit, no barriers to our progress except those we erect ourselves,” he said. “Already, pushing down tax rates has freed our economy to vault forward to record growth.”

Says Ben Wattenberg, former Johnson White House aide and editor of Public Opinion magazine: “When he tells people he’s going to get the government off their backs, he’s not asking for sacrifice, he’s offering a benefit.”

Holds Political Trumps

For the time being at least, the President appears to hold all the political trumps.

“I can’t recall a moment when a President has been so much in the catbird seat,” says Wattenberg. “Look at what’s happened--he carries 49 states in the election, the Russians come back to the negotiating table because he issues a press release on ‘Star Wars’ and the Dow Jones average goes through the roof.”

All of this reinforces the credibility of the rosy-hued portrait of the national condition Reagan sketched for his television audience. And some believe it helps build faith in the President and public acceptance for the spending cuts he advocates.

Blaming ‘the Situation’

University of Virginia government Prof. Larry Sabato says his students are concerned about the prospect of cuts in federal financial aid that helps pay their tuition costs but adds: “They don’t blame Reagan. They just blame what they call ‘the situation,’ which is something sort of nebulous.”

But he adds that this attitude toward Reagan might change for the negative, when and if the proposed budget cuts actually go into effect. An even worse prospect than that, from the President’s point of view, would be if no effective action is taken against the deficit and--fulfilling the dire predictions of some economists--the nation slips back into recession.

Such a predicament could be avoided, some critics say, if Reagan pursues what they consider to be a more candid course, warning the public of the deficits’ imminent peril and calling upon them for sacrifice. But it is difficult to find a precedent for chief executives asking directly for great sacrifice except in time of war.

War Taxes Acceptable

“War taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay,” observed the philosopher William James in a celebrated essay called “The Moral Equivalent of War.”

Years later President Carter adopted James’ title as the credo for his effort to inspire public sacrifice in support of his program to conserve energy. But critics, complaining of the skimpiness of the sacrifices for which Carter asked, twisted his slogan into a derisive acronym: “MEOW.”

John F. Kennedy was another President who found it hard to match political reality to the rhetoric of sacrifice. In his inaugural address Kennedy stirred Americans by urging them to “Ask what you can do for your country.”

“But the first thing Kennedy did,” Wattenberg points out, “was push through a tax cut.”