JOSEPH N. BELL -- The Bell Curve

I got 600 bucks from the feds last week. Given the state of journalism

these days, I don’t sneeze at 600 bucks. We have a lot of places to put

it. But it doesn’t feel right. Every time I look at that check, I think

of how many thousands of dollars the new tax law that provided my $600

will put in the pockets of the Texas oil pals of George W. Bush and Dick

Cheney. And of the pittance the hard-working men who do my yard will get.

And of the public programs that will suffer because their support money

is disappearing in a tax cut heavy on the high end.

The day I got my check, there was a front-page story in the Los

Angeles Times pointing out that because of this windfall for the rich,

government analysts now project a surplus so much smaller than expected

that the feds may have to draw on the Medicare trust fund to meet current

expenses and finance other critical programs. All because of that $600

check I got in the mail.

It has occurred to me that my wife and I could make some sort of

ironic statement by offering the money to Bush administration programs

that might be struggling because of the tax cut. Maybe to help pay Dick

Cheney’s light bill. Or to finance oil drilling in Central Park. Or to

design a massive bank of ice machines to protect the United States and

ensure that future generations die from poisoned air before global

warming gets us.

Or we could think even bigger. We might contribute to the development

of a test target for our anti-missile weapons that could be shot down

more easily -- in broad daylight and without decoys, of course -- and

thus justify a few more billions for a weapon that will be instantly

obsolete if it is ever made to work.

But this is all idle musing. Statements -- especially when they

involve money -- are unhappily only practical for the rich or the very

highly principled. To the less-than-rich, soft-in-the-head people like

me, there isn’t enough personal satisfaction in making statements to

compensate for the trip we have long wanted to take or the home repairs

we need to make or the appliance we need to replace -- which, of course,

the pols count on. And so we use the money and resent the administration

that laid this choice on us and the Democrats who supported it.

The thing that irritates me most is the smug, self-congratulatory

message printed on the bottom of the check that says: “Tax relief for

America’s workers.” This should amuse the people who do my yard --

providing they get a check. If the spin doctors who decided to use these

checks as a public-relations platform were even marginally honest, the

legend at the bottom would read something like: “Tax windfall for

America’s richest.”

Then I could have cashed it in a better frame of mind, knowing at

least I wasn’t buying into the baloney about “America’s workers.”

One of the funniest incidents to come out of the tax debate was a

rally called by the Republican leadership to support the Bush tax cut for

“America’s workers.” The rally organizers needed bodies as a backdrop for

TV coverage but found the only people planning to show up were the

Armani-suit types, which conveyed the wrong message.

So -- as reported in the New Republic -- they sent a memo to corporate

lobbyists that said, in part: “We do not need people in suits. If people

want to participate -- and we do need bodies -- they must be dressed

down, appear to be real worker types. We plan to have hard hats for

people to wear.”

Two Sundays ago, the Times Opinion section carried an article that

should be required reading in Washington. Among other things, it pointed

out that nearly a third of the adults requesting emergency food aid are

now working people with jobs. And the Economic Policy Institute estimates

that 29% of American families with young children don’t earn enough to

live at any acceptable level of comfort and security. These aren’t

indigent bums. They are hard-working people, many of whom pay income

taxes, and all of whom owe payroll taxes. Getting such low-earners off

the tax rolls, not fattening the income of the already rich, should be

the thrust of tax reform. Or to bring it closer to home, not the $600 I

received, either.

At least I know where the first $100 will go. My stepson, Erik, was

notified that he won’t get a rebate because we used him -- for the last

time -- as a dependent on our 2000 tax filing. So $100 seems the least we

can do. Erik earned $12,127 working six months last year and paid $1,394

back in income taxes. Next year, under the new law, he might, in addition

to his personal exemption, get an extra 20 or 30 bucks off his tax bill

-- enough to buy a tank of gas for the car he needs to get him to work.

Since the architects of the Bush tax cut believe in treating everyone

equally, Erik’s 30 bucks might well translate to $30,000 or even $300,000

for Americans whose tax base comes in a few million higher than Erik’s.

Fair is fair.

I’ve been thinking about appropriate things I might write across the

bottom of my estimated tax payment due next month. If the feds can do it

to my rebate check, I see no reason why I can’t send my own

public-relations message to the government. After dismissing clever

ripostes no one at IRS would understand, I came on the obvious answer.

I’m going to write on the bottom of my check: “Tax relief for America’s

workers.” And mean it.

* JOSEPH N. BELL is a resident of Santa Ana Heights. His column

appears Thursdays.