Gov. Wilson’s State Message

* Silence would have been preferable to your severely contorted editorial, “The Return of the Old Pete Wilson” (Jan. 10).

The Times applauds Wilson’s priorities of “checking crime, slowing illegitimacy and beefing up public education” but myopically dismisses Wilson’s consistent (at least recently) and racist position against non-European immigrants and affirmative action as just “political baggage.” Is it really children born out of wedlock that we should be concerned about versus children who are born to families unable to meet subsistence needs for lack of jobs and income? Why can The Times forgive Wilson’s take on immigration and affirmative action as mere “past political sins” when he has yet to reverse himself on these points?

The message is not commendable, and, we hope, will not fall on “deaf Democratic ears,” if California is to find a real agenda to replace Wilson’s personal goals for the advantaged.

ALBERT C. CARDENAS

Los Angeles

* In your editorial you’ve got it backwards. Wilson doesn’t use “divisive rhetoric.” You do. The governor has been very careful with his speech regarding the immigration issue. He wants less immigration. You’re the one calling it “immigrant-bashing.” Who’s being divisive here?

As for affirmative action, Wilson’s not divisive, it’s the program that’s divisive, which is precisely why he wants to end it. Here we’ve got something that was controversial from the beginning, was never intended to be permanent, the governor wants to end it, and you make it sound like he’s got a character flaw. You stop short of calling him a racist, but the implication is there, and it’s deliberate. Again, who’s being divisive?

You accuse the governor of “demagoguery.” Is it your opinion that he should not have run on those issues because they’re too emotional? They’re emotional because they’re important, and the governor’s position is very popular. Your effort to characterize it as “political baggage” and “past political sins” is wishful thinking.

STEVEN FOSTER

Los Angeles

* I want to correct a misperception and misstatement of fact in “Garcetti Backs Wilson on Getting Tough With Juveniles,” Jan. 10. I spoke out to encourage the public to support needed changes in our archaic juvenile justice system, changes that I have been working on with the governor and legislators since 1993. Many of my recommendations were incorporated in the governor’s State of the State address. There was a misperception in your story that I was merely jumping on the bandwagon to endorse the governor’s proposals, which is incorrect.

On Feb. 7, 1994, you printed my commentary detailing needed changes in juvenile justice. Among them were the needs for immediate consequences to every crime committed by a juvenile and to protect us from violent juvenile offenders by sending them directly to adult court, with adult punishment, including long prison sentences. Currently, even the most violent offenders sentenced by juvenile court to the California Youth Authority must be released by age 25--including multiple murderers. Those tried as juveniles cannot receive life without the possibility of parole, as your story reported.

GIL GARCETTI

District Attorney

Los Angeles County

* True to form, Wilson seeks to deal with the growing problem of teenage gun violence by attacking juvenile court judges and urging mandatory life prison sentences for 14-year-old offenders. As usual, he fails to ask the obvious question: How do so many 14-year-olds get guns?

Wilson does not ask this question because he knows the answer. Today, a handgun can be purchased on any schoolyard or corner for under $100. Such bargains are available because of the gross oversupply of firearms--there are literally more guns than people in the U.S.

But strict licensing and other measures to reduce the supply of guns would anger the all-powerful gun lobby. So, craven politicians like Wilson take the easy route of waiting for the inevitable bloodshed, then locking up the teenage perpetrators for life.

LAURANCE S. SMITH

Sacramento

* I found “Getting Tough on Teenage Pregnancies” (Jan. 7) quite interesting and informative. I also agree with those who feel that a stricter enforcement of the “statutory rape” law (which has been, and continues to be, on the books in California) will help to reduce the severity of this serious social problem. And I commend Wilson for suggesting a greater enforcement of this law.

JAMES H. FORD MD

Downey

* Does Wilson’s call for moral values (Jan. 9) include keeping a promise?

BETTY BARNETT

Pomona