Don't Expect Politicians To Protect Poor

To the editors:

The Crimson states in "A Troubled Tax Cut" (Editorial, Feb. 13) that George W. Bush's tax plan would "send most benfits to wealthiest Americans" while failing to focus on lower and middle-income families. While this certainly is true, should it come as any surpise in a system, as decribed by Madison, whose "purpose is to protect the minority of the opulent from the majority"?

If anything, executive behavior such as this corresponds with a well-established tradition in American politics: take care of the one-quarter of one percent that provides half of your politcal subsidy. Thus, exhortations like yours, while laudable in nature, are sure to meet with contempt in our system.

Rather unfortunate, but expected behavior in a political mileu governed by the rich.

Geoffrey S. Batt

West Chester, Pa.

Feb. 13, 2001

Spinning Kissinger

To the editors:

I do occasionally read your magazine Fifteen Minutes and was quite interested to read about the Central Intelligence Agency's history with Harvard (Magazine, "Harvard and the CIA", Feb. 8), my alma mater and yours soon enough.

But imagine my surprise in seeing the article include Henry A. Kissinger '50 as the one who helped President Lyndon B. Johnson "bring the boys home," as it was so jocularly put. Kissinger did not help Johnson bring the boys home, but rather did his best to see that Johnson could not bring the boys home--which, if anyone really cares, cost America 20,000 more boys and the Nixon presidency.

Something to keep in mind, I suppose, or perhaps not.

T.J. Kelleher '99

Brooklyn, N.Y.

Feb. 9, 2001

The writer is a former magazine chair.