The DREAM Act; the stimulus vs. a payroll-tax holiday; the return of the luxury shopper

Latino voters? In GOP’s dreams

Re “DREAM Act may haunt the GOP,” Dec. 15

It is no surprise the Republican Party has broken off its tepid seduction of Latino voters by opposing the DREAM Act. In the starkest of terms, the party is demonstrating why. Republicans demand tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires — at a time of great need for tax revenue — when the rich are doing just fine and don’t even need a tax cut.

Thus, Republicans laid bare what nearly everyone knew already: They are the party of the rich, never the party of lower-income people, whose ranks are growing. Therefore, Republicans are never the party of those who come to this country with little and largely don’t get much more for decades or longer.

For most ethnic groups, that has been true of Republicans for nearly all of the 20th century and always in the 21st. The party has now revitalized its hostility to those in the economic bottom half.

Ira Spiro

Los Angeles

Even the most optimistic “Latino outreach” activists in the Republican Party have never talked about winning a majority of the Latino vote. The hope is to win a consistently respectable share of that vote, in the 30% to 40% range.

Political professionals know that most likely, Latinos will always give more votes to Democrats than to Republicans. There are a variety of reasons for this, but that is the consensus of opinion.

Therefore, though the DREAM Act may “haunt” the GOP for some time, granting amnesty to potentially 2 million eventual Democratic voters would haunt the party even longer. That’s why most Republicans oppose the bill.

Mike Burns

Bakersfield

Still debating the stimulus

Re “Behind Clinton’s smile,” Opinion, Dec. 14

Jonah Goldberg’s suggestion that President Obama’s stimulus was the wrong fix for the economy omits key facts while making silly assumptions.

The stimulus worked quite well; it just wasn’t big enough to succeed in two years. Goldberg also assumes that the vast majority of leading economists who agreed that the nearly $800-billion stimulus was the right cure were wrong, while one, Lawrence B. Lindsey, was right to advise a payroll-tax holiday.

Demand drives hiring, not tax breaks. During the financial meltdown, Americans drastically cut spending and increased savings. The stimulus filled in part of the lost consumer spending, but not enough to prevent massive job layoffs, which further reduced consumer spending.

Richard A. Sanders

La Quinta, Calif.

The most absurd statement in Goldberg’s gleeful analysis of Obama’s unpopularity is that congressional Republicans were prepared to be bipartisan when he took office.

The threat of a filibuster of any Democrat-endorsed legislation became standard practice before the financial meltdown and bailout.

John Wolfenden

Sherman Oaks

Core values can be tough

Re “More than math,” Opinion, Dec. 13

The U.S. does need to define its core values, but the proposals by Linda J. Bilmes are wrong.

Government has expanded to the point at which it is destroying the private sector. Rewarding this irresponsible growth with more tax dollars only exacerbates the problem, yet she calls for more public sector “investment.”

Her claim that the U.S. can continue to borrow cheap money is specious; our credit rating has dropped.

Corrupt politicians continue to spend America into oblivion. The result of this insanity is increasing government intrusion into our lives.

Pat Murphy

Pacific Palisades

Thanks to Bilmes for articulating the deep-down challenge for Americans today.

What exactly are the values and priorities that underlie our legislation and voting?

Bilmes reminds us that the “president needs to lead the country in restoring our compassion and sanity.” We would all do well to remember that the true values of a country are reflected in how it treats its most vulnerable citizens.

I believe we have strayed from our values of social justice by focusing on tax cuts for the rich and not on the common good.

Claire Marmion

Long Beach

Nice shoes — for $630

Re “Luxury shoppers are back,” Dec. 15

The “luxury shoppers” interviewed for this article are repulsive. Is there really nothing better they can think of to do with $630 than buy a pair of shoes for a minor?

Moralizing aside, I’m truly baffled by these people. Buying stuff is not creative; it takes no imagination; it doesn’t make you better at anything; it doesn’t teach you anything; and it doesn’t expose you to anything unusual.

Of all the ways to pass your time, compulsive shopping sounds like the most boring. I don’t get it.

Lynette Padwa

Los Angeles

I’m so relieved to read that the wealthy are able to use their tax cuts to buy $5,000 watches. That’s what will get us back on track, not helping people like me trying to make house payments.

Ed Masciana

Torrance

Party’s over

Re “Fewer offices shell out for parties,” Business, Dec. 15

Reading this story, I was thinking about all the employees of companies scaling back on holiday parties who struggle with problems of excess consumption. It might be a relief to them not to be faced with the temptations of Christmases past. Let’s hope that after these companies return to profitability, they won’t also return to their profligate ways at this time of year.

The truth is that only a decadent society that has lost touch with the basic values of moderation and compassion can really enjoy living it up at over-the-top holiday parties.

Deanna Davis

Valencia

The mayor

Re “How disappointing,” Opinion, Dec. 14

I was never disappointed in L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, for the simple reason that I never expected him to do anything.

His legacy will be one of unkept promises that began with his pledge to the residents of his former City Council district that he would not leave them to run for mayor.

In his tenure, his appointment calendar has been known more for photo opportunities and travel than for meetings in which the mayor actually did something for the city.

Now, as he nears the end of his time in office, he is scrambling to be noticed again in the hopes that he can find some political appointment, because he wisely chose not to run for governor against Jerry Brown in the Democratic primary.

Brett Hampton

Northridge