Attacks on Ashcroft Unfounded

To the editors:

I am a political moderate and tend to disagree with many of former Sen. John D Ashcroft’s conservative views (“A Mixed Bush Cabinet,” Editorial, Jan. 5). However, the confirmation of an attorney general should be based on her or his ability to enforce the law. Ashcroft served as Missouri attorney general for nine years and governor of Missouri for eight years. In these nearly two decades, he was never accused of poorly enforcing the law and was repeatedly re-elected. The reasons The Crimson and other far-left activists espouse for rejecting his nomination are based on their political agendas and not on substantiated facts.

The underlying allegations of racism regarding Ashcroft’s campaign against Judge White are unfounded; of the 26 African-Americans nominated to the federal bench during Ashcroft’s tenure, he has voted to confirm 23 of them. The Crimson states that Ashcroft is opposed to affirmative action; so are a great deal of Americans, but that does not preclude them from holding a law-enforcement office. The Crimson cites a lawsuit against the National Organization of Women as proof that Ashcroft will not promote equality; this is downright ridiculous.

The other points mentioned—school prayer, the Microsoft anti-trust case and the federal funding of religious organizations—are all contentious issues on which Ashcroft holds strong beliefs. However, a person’s ideology should not prevent him or her from holding this office.

The Crimson makes an admirable effort to blur the line between ideology and capabilities, but this witch-hunt must end. Ashcroft has the experience and ability to serve the country well. He should and will be confirmed.

John F. Bash ’03

Jan. 8, 2000

The writer is secretary of the Undergraduate Council.