President Bush on the Rioting

The reasons for voter despair in 1992 have been capsulated in Robert Shogan’s excellent news analysis (“Unrest Promises Election Implications for Both Parties,” May 7). Shogan points out that “Bush campaign strategists believe the idea of aiding cities has limited appeal.” He quotes a Bush pollster who said, “The public wants some effort. The inner cities are becoming a threat. But from a polling point of view, it’s not one of the top five issues in the country.” This suggests that rather than make a commitment to solving a problem with limited political appeal, Bush has chosen to hedge, vacillate and blame his do-nothing policies on Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs.

Meanwhile, Bill Clinton is doing his own balancing act. According to pollster Daniel Yankelovich, “If Clinton is pushed by political pressures into promising economic programs targeted to blacks, he’s going to be in trouble. He will fall back into a major political trap.” So Clinton copped out by offering “no new programs (for inner cities) and stressed the need for greater discipline by individuals and more responsibility by his party.”

Is it any wonder that people either are not voting or are turning to Ross Perot, though they have no idea of how he would solve our problems? Even a pig in a poke has more appeal than Bush and Clinton.

DAN CHASMAN

Laguna Hills