During the last 40 years, the State of the Union speech has been transformed from a dry daytime status report little noticed outside of Congress into a primetime combination of pep talk and legislative shopping list intended primarily for public consumption.

In the final such speech of his career, President Clinton Thursday continued this transformation. There was plenty of cheerleading for a union the president called ” the strongest it has ever been,” but, fully aware that his shopping list is nothing more than a piece of paper as long as the other party controls the checkbook, the agenda-setting has now become pure politicking.

The staggering number and cost of new programs proposed would be absurd if Mr. Clinton truly thought all, or even most, would be enacted. But this chicken-in-every-pot stemwinder wasn’t about getting legislation passed. It was about getting Democrats elected in general, about getting his vice president and his wife elected in particular.

The blatant boosterism notwithstanding, one can only stand in awe of the president’s ability to work a crowd, especially a crowd of 270 million. Who, after all, doesn’t want better health care, better schools, more science and technology, less poverty? And who, thanks to the panning TV cameras, could fail to notice that virtually every ovation-generating proposal was met with scowls by a Republican leadership that seems to have perfected the art of looking grumpy?

Reps. Armey, Kasich and the rest of their choleric colleagues have reason to be morose. Even with seven years’ experience, they still have failed to learn that one of the things Mr. Clinton does best is to abscond with Republican themes. Poverty will be eradicated not by giveaways, but by rewarding work with tax cuts and credits. The same cuts and credits approach, what the GOP refers to as letting taxpayers keep more of their hard-earned money, will get more Americans into college. Expanded federal aid to education comes with a demand for proof of improved student performance, even the threat that failing schools will be shut down.

It was, oratorically and politically, a masterful performance by the president. And if next year’s State of the Union is given by President Gore with Sen. Clinton of New York leading the cheers, the full extent of his mastery will be revealed.

The senator’s response

The opposition-party response to a State of the Union address always has a bit of the losing proposition to it. The splendor of the House chamber setting, the uncountable ovations, the pomp, the circumstance makes for a presidential act nearly impossible to follow.

In chosing the moderate and refreshingly nonpartisan Sen. Susan Collins to deliver half of their party’s official response, Republican leadership chose well. In chosing education as the core of her remarks, Maine’s junior senator also chose well.

The GOP’s “Four-Point Plan for Educational Excellence” described by Sen. Collins is part plan, part evidence that congressional Republicans understand where most Americans are on the subject. More federal money for elementary and secondary schools, decisions on how it is spent made at the local level, federal grants to help states and communities train, recruit and retain good teachers, increasing the affordability of higher education — little to argue about there. Sen. Collins’ delivery was smooth and efficient — not once did she say “liberal” when she meant “livable” — and her plugs for Husson College, Bangor and Caribou were clever. Better yet, no scowling.