WASHINGTON -- Viewers just tuning in to the presidential campaign could have come away from the latest Republican debate with the notion that Texas Gov. George W. Bush wants to devote the entire federal surplus in future years to tax cuts.

REPUBLICAN DEBATE Here are the particulars of tonight's Republican presidential candidates debate. PARTICIPANTS: Texas Gov. George W. Bush, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Steve Forbes, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, Alan Keyes and Gary Bauer TIME: 7-8 p.m. PLACE: Johnson Theatren Paul Creative Arts Center, the University of New Hampshire MODERATOR: NBC's Tim Russert SPONSORS: New England Cable News, Manchester Union Leader, New Hampshire Public Television. PANEL: Alison King of New England Cable News, John DiStaso of The Union Leader, Jenny Attiyeh of New Hampshire Public Television. MORE COVERAGE Bush, McCain dominate GOP debate In N.H. living room, few minds made up Excerpts cast religion, taxes in spotlight Contenders romp in a colloquial exchange Truth Squad: Confusion over surplus and taxes in GOP debate Here we go again: A Bush pledges 'no new taxes'

"No one is suggesting we pass the entire surplus back to the taxpayers," Bush insisted in the face of attacks from Arizona Sen. John McCain.

"But your plan does," McCain said.

"No, it doesn't," Bush said.

"Yes, it does," McCain insisted.

No, it doesn't.

In the debate, as in the Democratic debates, candidates were not careful to distinguish between the overall budget surplus projected in the years ahead and that part of the surplus coming from Social Security.

No candidate in either party is proposing to plunder the Social Security portion -- the issue is what to do with the non-Social Security surplus, also known as the "available surplus." That's what McCain and Bush were arguing about.

But viewers had no way of knowing that.

"They forget that the person who is watching this debate and is otherwise involved in a life outside politics doesn't have the same set of assumptions," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.

There was still more room for confusion Thursday night.

Candidates Gary Bauer and Steve Forbes both voiced support for a "no tax" plank in the GOP platform. They actually meant a "no new taxes" pledge, or a promise not to raise taxes. But no one is talking about getting rid of them altogether -- not even close.

Also in the debate:

- Alan Keyes asserted that the Constitution does not address the separation of church and state. Although the phrase does not appear in the Constitution, the First Amendment opens, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" -- words used to build up a body of law that speaks to just such a separation.

- Bush swore to cut taxes "so help me God," and brushed away the prospect that national emergencies, such as war, might get in the way. Such developments would be "extreme hypotheticals," he said.

- Forbes, facing persistent questions on why his campaign seems not to have caught fire in New Hampshire, cited the example of Pat Buchanan, who pulled a surprise Republican primary victory in the state in 1996. "At this point he was in single digits" in opinion polls, Forbes said.

That was a touch melodramatic; Buchanan was at 15 percent in a major poll at the comparable stage of the 1996 campaign -- about three weeks from the New Hampshire primary.

But Jamieson said confusion over the two parts of the surplus has been the most enduring disservice committed in the debates with candidates from both parties so far -- that, and the fact that the budget performances everyone is counting on are merely forecasts and may not happen.

McCain argues that Bush's $483 billion, five-year tax cut plan eats up the non-Social Security surplus and more. Although that sets up a legitimate argument over whether the cuts go too far and might force money to be taken from Social Security, that's not how the issue was framed.