Republicans Shouldn’t Help the Unemployed
Re “How the Politicos Stole Christmas,” Commentary, Nov. 26: To the victor (Republican majority) go the spoils (corporate welfare). It is amazing that a bright man such as Robert Scheer actually hopes -- after belittling and tormenting President Bush in particular and Republicans in general -- that the Republican majority will turn around and reward the unemployed, who generally have not voted Republican.
Further, it is outrageous for Scheer, who consistently demonizes the right-wing religious right, to bring the name of Christ into his arguments about the Republicans not helping the poor. The Bush administration has been consistent in its belief that helping the poor is most efficiently done through churches, charities and faith-based initiatives. Even if the Republicans wanted to extend the unemployment benefits, it would be irresponsible, given federal and state deficits.
Yes, some of the recent legislation passed is payback for support in the recent campaign season, but what about the payback the unions and trial lawyers received from the Democrats under former President Clinton? By the way, I’m still waiting for my middle-class tax cut promised by Clinton.
The answer, and the Republicans have it correct, is that more tax cuts will stimulate investment, which in turn will stimulate jobs.
Therefore, unemployment benefits are at best a short-term solution and at worst a return to a welfare state.
Michael C. Rost
The breathtaking arrogance of the Republican congressional leadership in gifting the pharmaceutical companies and legitimizing offshore tax havens under the cover of homeland security is beyond contempt. Apparently one of the primary beneficiaries of the pharmaceutical provision is Eli Lilly and Co., whose chairman, just incidentally, has a seat on the president’s Homeland Security Advisory Council. And Bush’s budget director, Mitch Daniels, is a former Eli Lilly executive. I guess this holiday season will be a ho ho ho for corporate America and for the rest of us a hunk of coal in a sock. Unfortunately, it will probably be dirtier coal.