Gore Assails Proposals by Bradley, Bush

A combative Vice President Al Gore strongly attacked both his Democratic rival and the GOP front-runner Thursday, charging that former Sen. Bill Bradley and Texas Gov. George W. Bush are “poised to sacrifice fiscal responsibility” with proposals that Gore said would erase the budget surplus.

Gore seemed to go out of his way to deliver his double-barreled attack, approaching reporters in the back of a meeting hall after a folksy, hourlong issue discussion here with senior citizens.

Bradley’s health care plan, he said, would leave no funds to extend the lives of Social Security or Medicare, much less pay for new initiatives in areas such as education. As for Bush, Gore said: “They’ve made these expansive promises about tax cuts . . . [but] they cannot for the life of them figure out any way to match reality to the rhetoric and still not spend all of the surplus.”

The Bush and Bradley campaigns called Gore’s comments ill-informed and ill-advised, and Bradley spokesman Eric Hauser said linking his candidate to Bush was “illogical.”

“As Gov. Bush has shown in Texas, you can fully fund services such as education and return surpluses to the taxpayers if you set the right priorities,” said Bush spokeswoman Mindy Tucker. “Texas still has a budget surplus, and so would the nation, under Gov. Bush’s proposals.”

The Bradley campaign said his health plan, which would cost up to $65 billion a year, is “based on sound and reasonable assumptions” arrived at with help from “some of the country’s leading health care experts,” and would not exceed the budget surplus or cut into the Social Security surplus. Bradley, at a town hall appearance with Gore in New Hampshire on Wednesday night, defended the program’s costs, saying big ideas are needed to solve big problems.

Gore’s strongly worded attacks, which followed pointed but polite comments during a town hall meeting in New Hampshire the night before, were a reminder that Gore has never been a reluctant rhetorical brawler--whether as a campaigner or vice president.

During his opening remarks here to about 200 senior citizens, Gore respectfully referred to Bradley, a former three-term New Jersey senator, as “my opponent” for the Democratic presidential nomination. Then he quickly corrected himself, calling Bradley “my competitor.” He added: “I like Bill Bradley. I respect him. He’s a good person.”

But Gore then mocked Bradley’s health plan: “It may be a big idea. But it’s not a good idea.” He likened Bradley’s plan to alchemy, the House GOP’s Contract with America in 1994 and Reagan’s supply-side economics--”big ideas but not good ideas.”

In attacking Bradley’s plan, Gore cited an analysis by Kenneth E. Thorpe, an Emory University health policy expert who was a senior official in the Department of Health and Human Services and a key analyst for the ill-fated health reform plan proposed by President Clinton.

Thorpe said Bradley’s plan would cost “nearly $1.2 trillion” over 10 years while Gore’s would cost $312 million over the same period. Both estimates take into account optional coverage for outpatient prescription drugs for Medicare recipients.

Dr. Alan M. Garber, the director of the Center for Health Policy at Stanford University and a health advisor to Bradley, criticized the Emory report, saying the conclusions drawn by Thorpe seemed to be based largely on Thorpe’s own assumptions. “Thorpe’s particular piece, a lot of the numbers were not based on numbers we could analyze or confirm in any detail,” Garber said. “They seemed to be his opinion.”

Bradley has proposed paying for the health plan--as well as initiatives on child poverty and preschool education--with the federal budget surplus. Combined, the initiatives would cost $77 billion a year. The vice president vowed not to dip into the surplus to finance any of his spending proposals.

In its basic political strategy, the Bradley health plan is similar to Gore’s health care blueprint. But Bradley makes a more expansive commitment to providing access to the uninsured.

An irritated-sounding Hauser said Bradley had no plans to respond in kind to Gore’s attacks, which he said were an indication of a desperate campaign.

“They had a slight pause in the attack mode of the campaign--they decided not to attack on television last night,” Hauser said. “But now they are back to what is becoming the tone of their campaign.”

Alluding to Bradley’s rise in opinion polls, he added: “For months, they ignored us. Then they sensed we were making a positive impression, so they moved to Nashville. Now they are attacking again. It’s part of a pattern. Where it’s headed, I do not know.”

Bush spokeswoman Tucker said Bush’s record as Texas governor has shown he can fulfill his campaign promises of returning money to taxpayers without running up deficits. Texas has approved about $3 billion in tax cuts during Bush’s governorship while still managing to deliver on key campaign pledges, such as increasing funding for education by $8.3 billion, all while maintaining a surplus, she said.

Also on Thursday, President Clinton conceded that the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal may hurt Gore’s campaign, saying, “a lot of people who may not like me may hold it against him.”

But Clinton, speaking at a news conference, said Americans should give Gore credit for the administration’s accomplishments. During the town hall Wednesday, Gore said Clinton’s behavior had disappointed and angered him.

Chen reported from Dubuque, Bustillo from Los Angeles.