The People as Props.

• Author: Ehrenreich, Barbara
• Position: President Bush's proposed tax cuts would mean an extra $100,000 for the Bush family

George W. Bush formally launched his campaign for a $1.6 trillion tax cut with a little set piece of unusual dramatic interest. Assembled for his February 5 press conference were three families drawn from the Richmond, Virginia, area, forming a sort of tableau vivant just behind the President, smiling stiffly, babies held tightly to their chests. Each of these families, he explained, represented one of the three new lower tax brackets that would be created under his plan. The poorest of these families would gain $1,055 from the proposed tax cuts; the richest, $2,181. A reporter asked why no one was there to represent the top tax bracket, and one could briefly imagine this fourth family, in their cashmeres and silks, perhaps set decorously apart from the other three, fidgeting and checking their Rolexes as the proceedings dragged on. "Beg your pardon," the President responded with a puckish smile, "I'm representing--I got a little pay raise coming to Washington from Austin. I'll be in the top bracket."

It was a moment of breathtaking honesty, noted by the press only as another example of the President's vaunted "charm." He may not be reliably able to match subject to verb--or in this case, follow verb with object--but, the pundits agree, he does have a sweet sense of humor. Yet what he was saying is that there are classes in American society (a fact that even Democrats are often loath to admit), that the wealthiest of them now clearly rules, and that their very first act will be to give themselves a sizable bonus. According to the Washington-based group Citizens for Tax Justice, George and Laura, with an income of about $2 million--including the Presidential salary of $400,000 a year--will be rewarded, if the tax cuts are approved, with an extra $100,000.

None of the family members assembled to serve as Bush's backdrop had anything to say, nor do we any longer expect the sub-rich and non-powerful to have speaking parts in the American system of governance. In the latest political nomenclature, they are what is known as "real people," and serve chiefly as ceremonial props. Some governmental rituals require the presence of armed guards at attention; others deploy a chaplain to similar effect. But if the event is meant to convey a sense of democratic commonality, then a few "real people" are essential accessories. No Presidential State of the Union address is complete without at least one "real person" in the audience, who will be used to...