Free TV Ads and Toll Roads

Re “Clinton Proposes Free TV Time for Candidates,” March 12: I am appalled that President Clinton would suggest, and The Times would support (editorial, March 13), the idea of singling out a particular industry and forcing the participants to give away their product to politicians.

What a horrible idea. Who decides who gets air time, and when? TV campaign ads are arguably the most reviled aspect of American civilization. They do nothing to advance the political process.

After we force broadcasters to give away air time, do we then force production companies to produce political ads for free? Do we force The Times to give away free ad space? Do we force hotel chains to provide free room and board for politicians and their entourages? How about airline tickets?

TV campaign ads are expensive, and poison the process. I suggest we do away with them altogether.

TOM DE LUCA

Manhattan Beach

I agree with your editorial. Political candidates should be given free air time to spout their message. They should only pay for the use of transmitters, satellites, broadcast facilities and the salaries of the workers that make it all happen.

While we’re at it, how about free publication in The Times? Your paper and press costs are synonymous with broadcasting facilities, but the streets and sidewalks trod upon by your delivery people to put The Times on my doorstep are public property. Just like air time.

RICHARD M. JEPPERSON

Glendale

In the great tradition of Ronald Reagan, whose tax increases on the poor and middle class were often disguised as “user fees,” Clinton now proposes to turn the interstate highway system into a series of toll roads (March 13).

Instead of instituting yet another Reaganite regressive tax scheme designed to provide even more tax relief to the affluent at the expense of the poor, Clinton and his right-wing cronies in Congress would do well to look elsewhere for funding. After all, recent revelations have made it very clear that both Democrats and Republicans can be quite adept at raising cash when they put their minds to it.

RONALD O. RICHARDS

Los Angeles

In his March 13 Column Right urging a broader discussion of “money in politics” as a goal of any investigation focusing on the Clinton fund-raising scandals, James P. Pinkerton targets the forest but not the trees. Yes, the current campaign finance system needs a serious overhaul, and yes, independent “issue” advocacy groups will likely continue their huge expenditures outside of any resulting restrictions on political action committees or soft money outlays.

But lost in the shuffle will be a president who has again avoided any serious personal accountability because the investigation was either too broad, or maybe the people just didn’t seem to care much either way. Until American citizens demand to know exactly how some foreign hustler gained access to the White House or why Mrs. Clinton is so adept at crafting responses expertly laced with just the right amount of deniability, then we deserve what we get.

JIM GRADY

Anaheim

Why do the media expect candidates for political office to stop running for office just because they’ve been elected? Are only losers entitled to continue campaigning for the next election? Politicians are in the business of being politicians, so let’s stop wasting taxpayer dollars investigating them for doing what comes naturally. I’d like to see our elected officials go about their elected business instead of being sidetracked with investigations. Trying to change a tiger’s stripes is as dumb (and costly) as trying to make a kinder, more friendly (or honest) tiger.

VICKI SCHOENFELD

Rancho Palos Verdes

If these renegade Southern Democrats, who are parading as Republicans, could ever get over their obsession with “getting” Clinton and focus some of their attention on legislating, perhaps something would be done to correct the flaws in campaign financing.

Also, if the news people would divorce themselves of the same motives, then perhaps the public would be spared the duplicity relating to every facet of Clinton’s life. SAMMY L. REED

Inglewood