NATIONAL POLITICS NOW DEFINED BY AN ABSENCE OF 'HOT' ISSUES

WASHINGTON -- We've won the Cold War. Balanced the budget. Cut crime, got
the economy humming.

Now what?

For the first time in decades, no one knows what should come next. Sure,
everyone has his or her own idea of what is the most important problem for
the country and the government to tackle. But few Americans agree with one
another, and no single issue dominates the national agenda the way national
security or the federal budget deficit did for years.

In poll after poll, few if any issues are listed as a top national concern
by more than 10 percent of the public.

This unusually blank slate -- all the more striking in an election year --
invites several different results.

It already is leading politicians to make a federal case out of
traditionally local issues, such as hiring schoolteachers. It is prompting
special-interest groups to push their goals more forcefully onto the
national stage. And it could produce a divided government unable to agree
on the problems, let alone solutions.

``There is no clear road map in terms of what the American public wants the
next issue to be for Congress to focus on,'' said Ed Goeas, a Republican
pollster.

Absence of an issue

``It leaves the election with a fairly disengaged electorate and vulnerable
to currents we might not be focused on right now,'' said Democratic
pollster Stan Greenberg. ``In the absence of a big issue, small issues can
rush in. We just don't know which ones.''

Lacking a clear agenda, even well-meaning politicians can misinterpret what
the people want.

Ask President Clinton. He thought the people wanted health care reform in
1993 -- but they rebelled at what he proposed. Ask the Republicans who took
over Congress in 1995. They thought the people wanted them to rein in the
federal government at all costs, but the people turned angry when the
government shut down.

Without an agenda, not much gets done beyond the routine. Washington
politicians rarely are able to make real progress on an issue until it
becomes a crisis or, more important, reaches critical mass in the minds of
voters.

Take the federal budget deficit. It took more than a decade of deficits and
growing anger on the part of voters before both political parties agreed to
adopt potentially painful measures to curb the problem.

But these days Americans appear quite happy being left alone -- at least
for now.

``There's no sense of crisis, either economic or in values,'' said
Kellyanne Fitzpatrick, a Republican pollster.

``People are increasingly unanchored from big things, from big
institutions. There's no national glue in our fabric because we don't all
turn and look to the government or media to identify solutions.''

Still, there are politicians and interest groups out there ready to write a
new agenda driven by politics, principles or both.

``It's a very good opportunity for the ideological parts of both parties to
push their agenda,'' said Fitzpatrick. ``Most Americans feel settled and
prosperous enough that they're not fighting for basics, like economic
security. All of that is there. There's no risk of people saying, `Why are
you fighting for something else now?'

So, you're able to gently lead Americans to a bolder agenda, things you
might not try to achieve when calls of national security or prosperity are
at hand.''

President Clinton has proposed a new round of expansions of government
services, including Medicare and federal support for child care. House
Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., has proposed a long-term goal of reducing the
overall federal, state and local tax burden from the current total of about
40 percent of wages to 25 percent.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., recently unveiled an ambitious agenda for a
``new progressive era,'' including an increase in the minimum wage, a big
boost in tobacco taxes to finance health care, federal financing to hire 1
million local teachers over 10 years, and extending Social Security taxes
to wages beyond the current limit of $65,000 while cutting the rate for
everyone -- from 6.2 percent to 5.3 percent.

Things that annoy

``We have been given an extraordinary moment in history; let's not waste
it,'' Kennedy said. ``Let's direct the tide, not just ride it.''

In this new era, some things will become issues just because there's an opening.

``We'll see some candidates, parties and consultants will try and create a
perception that there's crisis,'' said David Hill, a Houston-based GOP
consultant. ``There are things out there that annoy people, but are not
really an issue.''

Until politicians get hold of them, that is. He pointed to the 1997
governor's race in Virginia, when the Republican candidate made an issue
out of a hated tax on cars and rode it to election.

``It was something that annoyed people, but people didn't think of it as an
important problem, in part because they didn't think they had a chance to
get rid of it,'' Hill said. ``Then a politician comes along and says,
`Let's get rid of it.' ''

Some issues move higher on the agenda because it helps politicians.

Voters tend to trust Democrats more on such subjects as education and the
environment, and Republicans more on topics such as taxes or defense. So,
politicians try to move the agenda onto the issues that help them. And
their opponents either try to change the agenda, or at least co-opt the
issue.

Take education. Democrats are proposing various plans to hire local
teachers. Republicans used to oppose any federal role in local education,
but have faced angry voters as a result. Now, they already have countered
with a proposal to pay for 100,000 new teachers over five years.

The result: Federal financing of local teachers is on the agenda. All that
remains is the likely compromise over numbers.

Or health care. Both parties perceive some anger about restrictions on
health care imposed by health maintenance organizations or other
managed-care health programs, but the Democrats appear more aggressive.
Wednesday, Clinton proposed a patients' ``bill of rights'' to assure
top-quality care from HMOs.

``There's a real opportunity for the Democrats to create a populist agenda
around fighting for the middle class. Probably our best bet for that is the
HMO bill of rights,'' said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster. ``That
agenda can be broadened into an agenda around education and family economic
security as well.''