Schulman on the Wealth of Presidents

Bruce J. Schulman leaps over the crucial link between status and opportunity (“Anyone Can Be President, But It Helps to Be Rich,” Oct. 12). Americans do not have an inherent “taste for rich rulers” as Schulman claims; rather, Americans choose rulers from a pool of candidates who can afford to put themselves in the game.

It’s no surprise that voters want someone with extraordinary educational and professional achievements to hold the highest office. There’s a correlation between privileged socioeconomic background and access to superior resources. This correlation was even stronger in the “good ol’ days,” from which Schulman cites Washington, Roosevelt and Kennedy as prime examples of Americans’ preference for privileged leaders.

Although the traditional party network has given way to increased opportunity for individual media campaigning, the cost of entering the race remains largely prohibitive to those who can’t attend the best schools, who can’t afford unpaid internships and who can’t improve their chances with an infusion of personal dollars to the campaign fund.

JENNIFER HENDERSON

Los Angeles

Schulman’s interpretation of the historical record concerning the wealth of some presidents, and the effect of that wealth on the electorate is, to be charitable, a mighty stretch. One might even go so far as to call it bunk, if one was in an uncharitable mood. Sure, there have been rich men elected president--the Roosevelts, John Kennedy, Herbert Hoover and George Bush come to mind--but was it their wealth that made them electable? That’s certainly open to debate.

Schulman wants his readers to believe that it’s easier to be elected president if you’re rich. Ross Perot and Steve Forbes might disagree with that. Perot and Forbes are certainly rich by any measure, but was George Washington? Sure, he had land and slaves, but he had to borrow money to finance the trip to New York to be inaugurated in 1791. Was Washington elected president because he was rich or because he beat the British?

And where in the historical record does it say that Harry Truman and Abraham Lincoln were rich? Lincoln was a modestly successful frontier lawyer who was elected mainly because the Democrats split asunder, allowing an unknown man from Illinois to be president. Truman, who was perhaps comfortable financially, was a senator who was made president because Franklin Roosevelt picked him as vice president and then died. He was reelected because Thomas Dewey didn’t know how to campaign and was less trusted than Truman.

CHARLES MUSER

Irvine