Newt Gingrich’s First 100 Days

* Your April 5 edition reported that House Speaker Newt Gingrich is pushing for one of the provisions of his “contract with America” which would give a tax windfall to large corporations. The problem with it is that in the second five years following its passage, it would “cost the Treasury more than $100 billion.”

Being one of those who paid into that “entitlement” program of Social Security for 42 years before seeing any of its benefits, I get a warm glow all over knowing that a good chunk of my payments is going to be helping the needy corporations.

DOUGLAS H. THOMPSON

Palos Verdes

* Referring to “Gingrich’s Pseudo-Revolution,” Opinion, April 2: It’s obvious that Kevin Phillips just doesn’t get it. The American people do not want to tinker with welfare, we want the federal government to get out of the welfare business! We are willing to let the Republicans make changes gradually, but we want changes. We don’t believe it is moral to take money from working Peter to pay non-working Paul. Welfare should go back to the private sector where it can be administered more efficiently and humanely. We are tired of 40% of our income going to government. We would prefer to spend it ourselves.

As far as our view of Gingrich, we love him! He is doing more in the short time he has been Speaker than the Democrats did in 40 years of power. We don’t trust the polls you cite. After all, look how wrong they were in this past November election.

PAT SORIANO

El Toro

* Thanks for running the Phillips piece, finally, definitively taking apart our charlatan Speaker Newt. The Republicans claim this is one smart Congress. Well, it’s also often said that a man can be so smart that he’s actually dumb. My belief is that this is the dumbest Congress, at least in reference to the Republican majority, in living memory, dumb on domestic issues, appallingly stupid in foreign policy.

Buy a used car from a guy like Newt? I wouldn’t even take one of his history courses.

BERNARD LEASON

Atascadero

* Phillips’ critique shows his disdain for the results of the first 90 days of “the revolution” and his implied superior understanding of history. The comparison with Roosevelt’s First Hundred Days makes Phillips conclude that this effort will fail for lack of an “energizing national crisis.” But Phillips is kidding himself if he thinks the electorate is not clearly aware of the catastrophic consequences of continuing with the 42-year tax-and-spend/entitlements-for-all government.

The complaint that “30% to 40% of the contract will never reach the President’s desk” conveniently ignores the terms of the contract, which stated that these 10 issues would be brought to the floor of the House for vote during the first 100 days. There was no guarantee of passage of anything, but simply a promise to the American people that the issues they were most interested in would no longer languish in Democrat-controlled committees providing cover for those same Democratic congressmen who did not want to vote the will of their constituents. Gingrich has brought these issues to the floor.

The only item on the contract, to date, that has failed to pass in the House of Representatives is the term-limits bill. This was approved by 85% of the Republicans and was rejected by 18% of the Democrats. The voters in 1996 will have to decide how serious they are regarding this issue. If they want a citizen legislature they might consider replacing those who disagree with them at the ballot box. In any event, failure on one of 10 items is a slim basis for condemnation of Gingrich, unless a .900 batting average is no longer considered acceptable.

CLINE C. DUFF

Fullerton

* A true contract with America promotes health care, education, housing, employment training and opportunities for all Americans, especially people with need: children, the elderly, single parents, unemployed youth and veterans. No more cuts that destroy hope for our people.

JOHN AUGUST SWANSON

Los Angeles

* Re “Weary House Republicans Set Breakneck Legislative Pace,” March 26:

Nice of you to note that they have worked harder than any Congress in my lifetime, have accomplished more, and to the best of their ability they have lived up to their word. The fact that they have kept their word is the most important thing to me and to many of us who had completely lost faith in the utterances of any politician. I would hope that this will rub off on Democrats, who might honor their words for a change the next time they take office.

Nobody can call this Congress a bunch of lazy bums who lay around drawing their paychecks for doing nothing.

HOWARD VEIT

Los Angeles