Liberal Principles and Welfare Reform Law

Being an unrepentant liberal like Robert Scheer (Column Left, Aug. 27), I, too, don’t think the fact that over 70% of citizens polled supported the new welfare “reform” law was adequate reason to sign it. Had I been president, I would have vetoed it.

But there is no more likelihood that I might be elected president than Scheer--or Sens. McGovern, Kennedy or Mondale, for that matter. In 1968, I was “Clean for Gene” in the New Hampshire primary, but was hoofing for Hubert Humphrey in the fall, because I believed that Richard Nixon would be worse. He was.

Jimmy Carter wasn’t my kind of Democrat either, but I worked for him, because I believed that Ronald Reagan would be worse. He was.

Although part of me would love to vote for Ralph Nader, I’ll vote for Bill Clinton instead, because most of the time he does the right thing and the fact is, well, Bob Dole would be worse. Much worse.

We unrepentant liberals need to forgo cheap attacks on politicians who make pragmatic choices in accordance with what appears to be the popular will. We need, instead, to do the slow, grinding work of trying to persuade enough of our fellow citizens of our beliefs so that the pragmatic choices politicians make are the ones we would like to see.

TED RUML

Redlands

*

* Which Clinton do we believe? The one who signed the welfare bill, or the one who’ll “adjust it” after the election? Which Democratic platform do we believe? The one that’s anti-quotas, or the one that mandates 50% women in every delegation?

S.Z. NEWMAN

Los Angeles

*

* Reading Arianna Huffington (Column Right, Aug. 27) preaching about people who are unprincipled on the subject of welfare has a wonderful ring of “Alice in Wonderland” (Column Right, Aug. 27).

What more unprincipled duet in politics has ever existed that outranked the free-wheeling, free- spending Huffingtons in what was probably Arianna’s own quest for a Senate seat her husband could keep warm? Tossing more than $24 million into empty campaigning virtually to buy a place of power is unprincipled.

Now she casts her critical eye on people who didn’t jump ship because of a major policy decision of the president. Don’t like what happens? Grab your ball and glove and head home. Brilliant and articulate as Huffington may be, she needs to be readmitted to the real world in which change does take place without rebellion in the ranks.

JOSEPH J. HONICK

Tucson, Ariz.

*

* Re “Welfare Reform: Just Who’s Going to Create All the Jobs?” editorial, Aug. 27:

So The Times has finally “put it in writing” for posterity: Immigrants who look for a job will be competing for scarce jobs with welfare recipients and the unemployed. Will inadvertent wonders never cease!

HARVEY PEARSON

Los Angeles