President Bush took to the airwaves Wednesday night to warn the nation that unless government approves Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's $700 billion bailout of the nation's foundering financial institutions, America could "slip into a financial panic." He ticked off a list of disastrous consequences that could occur: More banks could fail, the value of homes and retirement accounts would plummet further, credit would tighten to the point that businesses close and jobs vanish.

Hours later, Bill Heard Enterprises, the nation's biggest Chevrolet dealer, added an exclamation point to Bush's speech. The company announced that it was closing its dealerships because it could no longer make it. The market has turned away from trucks and SUVS, and GM, which is itself struggling, had refused to extend credit for new inventory to some Heard dealerships.

Late yesterday, Congress and the White House announced that they were near an agreement in principle to a bailout, but no one knows if it will work.

Some economists say that Paulson is making the deal of a lifetime on the taxpayers' behalf. The Treasury will buy debts that will be worth far more in a few years. Others say the bailout will have only a temporary effect because it does not address the bad debts lenders have in credit card bills and other non-mortgage obligations. A few say the bailout could make matters worse.

One impact of the crisis is clear: The next president will not be able to make good on all the wonderful spending proposals made on the campaign trail, at least not any time soon. Not without raising taxes. Both Barack Obama and John McCain now agree that delays in their spending plans are inevitable. But they have not agreed that their tax plans should change.

Obama's tax plan might make things better. It would lower the bills of 95 percent of Americans and give the biggest savings, 3 percent, to those making under $19,000 per year, according to the Tax Policy Center. Because Obama's plan returns most of the money to people likely to be struggling with credit card debt and overdue mortgages, it could help them repay their loans, thus strengthening banks. His plan would raise taxes by roughly 10 percent for those making more than $603,000. Because of that increase, his tax plan does less than McCain's to increase the national debt.

It's not clear whether Obama's plan will ultimately be affordable. But McCain's plan, which targets the majority of tax cuts to the wealthy, isn't. Nor is it fair, nor wise.

Obama's plan, according to CNN, would put $567 back in the pocket of the nation's poorest taxpayers. Under the McCain plan, they would get $19. At every income level under $112,000, taxpayers would benefit more under the Obama plan. Taxpayers with incomes higher than that would win with McCain, though he too would raise taxes on the rich. Those earning more than $2.9 million annually would pay an extra $269,364 under McCain's plan, but they'd have to pony up $701,885 more under Obama's plan.

McCain is betting on the same trickle-down tax policy that was behind the Bush tax cuts. His plan would worsen the growing gap between the rich and everyone else and do little to help those who need help the most.

With taxpayers poised to assume yet another mind-boggling debt in hopes of keeping the economy float, both candidates will have to change their tax plans. Obama's plan should be altered; McCain's should be scrapped.