Tax cut fever has seized Washington. The President is talking about it, congressional leaders are discussing it and the Federal Reserve Chairman has testified in favor of it. Everyone seemingly agrees that soaring surpluses dictate the need for tax relief.

I support a tax cut, but it must be done in a way that is fair and that protects our long-term fiscal future. While giving Americans a tax cut is almost a foregone conclusion, the important question we need to be asking is how to do it while also continuing to pay off the debt and strengthening Social Security and Medicare in anticipation of Baby Boom retirees.

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan recently testified that a tax cut is warranted because of the projected size of the surplus -- $5.6 trillion over 10 years -- estimated by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). But he also made clear his strong preference for debt reduction over tax cuts to ensure that we do not return to the days of annual budget deficits. Those concerns were echoed by former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who was the chief architect of the fiscal and budget policies that helped us move from deficits to surpluses.

Rubin, writing in the New York Times, voiced concerns about preserving the prosperity. Addressing the size of President Bush's proposed $2 trillion tax cut, Rubin said it "would create a serious threat of deficits." Obviously, that is a result we must avoid.

To address this problem, Chairman Greenspan suggested a possible "trigger" mechanism that could be used to cut off tax relief in a particular year if the projected surplus fails to materialize. This suggestion highlights the Fed Chairman's strong concern over the risk of renewed budget deficits.

However, it would be very difficult to craft an effective "trigger" mechanism that would not be subject to political pressures. In any case, once tax cuts have been approved, it would be extremely difficult to reverse or repeal them.

Concern about an impending economic slowdown is legitimate. Economists are predicting a three to six month slowdown, with a recovery coming before the end of the year. Very few economists believe, however, that a tax cut will put money into the hands of American consumers quickly enough to act as a stimulus.

The other rationale for across-the-board tax cuts is to reduce the projected federal budget surplus. After years of record budget deficits, we now have the largest surplus in history. But we must remember that the CBO projections are just that -- projections. The tax and spending decisions we make now should be based on conservative, prudent assumptions that do not risk returning us to the budget deficits we so recently escaped.

The surplus is estimated at $5.6 trillion over 10 years, but CBO admits the estimate has only a probable accuracy of 50%. Even if these long range surplus projections are correct, not all the $5.6 trillion surplus is available for tax cuts and/or spending increases. First, $2.5 trillion is the Social Security surplus and must be used only for Social Security.

Second, we need to treat the $392 billion of Medicare surplus the same way we do Social Security -- put them off-limits for any other uses. Also, added increases in defense and other non-discretionary spending programs are likely to significantly reduce the surplus to approximately $2 trillion.

I believe President Bush's call for a $1.9 trillion tax cut over the next 10 years has crossed the line of careful fiscal planning. Instead, Congress should follow a more responsible path by reserving one-third of the projected non-Social Security surplus for debt reduction, one-third for Social Security, Medicare, education, health care, and defense needs, and one-third for tax cuts. This approach would give us a safety zone in case the actual surplus does not materialize, while still allowing a tax cut of $700 billion.

A tax cut of that size would accommodate needed incentives for retirement savings, including expanded 401(k) accounts and IRAs, education tax breaks, estate tax relief, and needed simplifications of our ridiculously complex tax code.

I support a reasoned, responsible tax cut that will return money to Americans in a fair and balanced way, and that also will protect our fiscal future. It's easy to spend the surplus before we have it, but it would be a tragedy to return to the days of deficit spending, particularly as we face the growing needs of an aging Baby Boom generation as it nears retirement.