Party Leaders Vie for Budget-Cut Honors : Congress: Neither Republican nor Democratic legislators seem to give Clinton’s middle-income tax cut plan much of a chance.

While Administration officials scoured the federal budget for ways to pay for the President’s tax-cut plan, lawmakers argued Sunday over which party is better equipped to manage the government’s books.

And neither Republican nor Democratic legislators seemed to give President Clinton’s middle-income tax cut much of a chance.

Rep. Bill Archer, incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, would say only that the President’s plan “is going to be considered.”

Appearing on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press,” the Texas Republican chided Clinton for weighing in last with a tax-cut plan. “He came late to the dance, but he’s on the dance floor and we welcome that,” Archer said.

Outgoing Senate Finance Committee Chairman Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) said he doubts that the GOP will pass a tax cut that is paid for--or one that the President will be able to sign.

“I would think in the end the calculation by the new majority would be: ‘Why give the President that credit? . . . Don’t give the President a bill he can sign.’ It will be part of the strategy,” he said on CBS-TV’s “Face the Nation.”

Clinton’s package of tax cuts for families raising children, paying tuition or planning for retirement is mostly aimed at households earning less than $75,000 a year. House Democrats proposed less-restrictive tax breaks for families earning less than $75,000. By far the priciest plan is the GOP proposal to give tax credits for children in families earning less than $200,000.

Clinton claims he can cut $72 billion from the federal budget in five years to pay for his $60-billion program. But $52 billion of the cuts are unspecified and would not take effect until 1999 and 2000.

The President, who planned to unveil some of the cuts today, has his aides and agency officials reviewing several options, including:

* Making the nation’s air traffic control system private.

* Slashing $22 billion over five years from the Energy Department, one of the agencies Clinton had considered eliminating.

* Cutting $700 million from the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s $30-billion budget, mainly by consolidating 60 programs into a handful of block grants to cities.

Lawmakers from both parties, appearing on Sunday TV news shows, agreed in principle on one point: The federal government must be drastically reduced.

Asked about proposals to eliminate various Cabinet agencies, incoming House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt said: “I don’t put that off the table.”

But there was sharp disagreement over which party is best suited to make the budget cuts to give the middle class a tax break.

Gephardt, of Missouri, lambasted the GOP “contract with America.” “Over half of the tax benefits in their contract goes to people who earn over $100,000 and blows a $700-billion hole in the deficit,” he said on ABC-TV’s “This Week With David Brinkley.”

“The Republicans have yet to come forward with cuts they’re going to need to make this contract work,” Gephardt said. “I doubt they’re going to be able to do it.”

Incoming House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas replied: “Mr. Gephardt continues to incorrectly and inaccurately spout the party line that they’ve lived by since the 1980s. He’s in a state of denial.”