Khachigian’s Thinking Unclear

* Hasn’t Kenneth Khachigian ever heard the old story about people who live in glass houses not throwing stones?

In his bilious manner, Khachigian on Nov. 22 criticizes Democrats for lacking women congressional leaders, but conveniently overlooks the Republicans’ omission of them. Not that people should be chosen based on their race or gender.

Also, with regard to his critique of House minority leader Richard Gephardt and others who don’t see the sense in turning Social Security into “investment accounts” for individuals, why doesn’t Khachigian explain what he means by these accounts?

Doesn’t he recall that the Social Security Act was passed in 1935 to counteract the effects of the Depression, with its massive unemployment and destitution of citizens? A Depression preceded by a huge banking and stock market crash?

Does Khachigian mean these accounts would be administered similarly to employer 401(k) accounts, where individuals could choose from a roster of approved (conservative) investment vehicles?

Or does he just think in the interest of liberty that individuals should be able to invest in speculative stocks and commodity futures? What will happen when these people speculate away their accounts? Will the federal government have to institute another Social Security Act, Part II, to bail out those people? You know that’s what will happen.

Khachigian and other Republican leaders need to clarify what they’re talking about because even most Republicans probably wouldn’t support unrestricted accounts.

CAROL MATHEIS

Foothill Ranch