READ HIS LIPS: NO NEW DEMOCRATS
The Republican National Committee is faxing around a Philadelphia Inquirer report on a visit Dick Gephardt made to Philly last week. Gephardt said that if the Democrats take back the House in 2000, he will push for much higher federal spending on education-and fund it with tax hikes and defense cuts. "'You've got to have a combination of taking out of the defense budget and raising revenue,' he said. 'We can argue about how to do that, closing loopholes or even raising taxes to do it.'" Gephardt added that while he does not believe a tax increase would be necessary, "'I'd be proud to vote for tax increases for schools. You bet I would. . .'" We'd better do something to fix the schools. Too many more defense cuts, and we're all going to have to learn Chinese.

THIS JUST IN
Did you know that in the House, "the Republicans' precariously small advantage-222 seats to 211 for the Democrats-is the narrowest in 46 years"? That "[i]f any six GOP lawmakers bolt their party, House leaders lose control"? For analysis of this caliber you have to turn to Gerald F. Seib's column, published on Wednesdays on the back page of the Wall Street Journal's front section. In today's column, we learn that "this delicate balance seems to be paralyzing the House along partisan lines." Since it's a slow news week, Seib looks ahead to next year: "[I]f you had to bet now, you'd be smart to count on a tight 2000 general-election environment."

But that's not all. We also learn that ten key states are likely to determine the presidential election, including -- who'd have guessed? -- Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Half of these states "have older-than-average populations, guaranteeing that Social Security will be a huge topic." Is it possible that the other half of these states have younger-than-average populations, guaranteeing that education will be a huge topic? Tune in next week.