I object to the title, tone, and content of your editorial about Hillary Clinton, "Hillary Pilloried," April 13. You seem to imply that because she is "smart, outspoken and ambitious," there is something wrong with her. Hillary Clinton's ambition has been unselfish. A distinguished and recognized scholar, she has embarked on a legal career which has done a great deal for children. Furthermore, the mettle of her character has been proven.
Your editorial tries to hide this light under a bushel simply because we have never had such a phenomenon in the White House before. We would have two highly qualified individuals there for the price of one. It may be that Hillary Clinton will have to break the mold and establish a new path for presidential wives. I only hope she gets a chance to do it. Sallie Kantor Key, Upper Montclair, N.J. The value of child care
Regarding the column "Showing More Care for the Care Givers," April 13: In her concern about the present low pay for child-care workers, the author suggests that "attitudes left over from paying teenage babysitters on Saturday night perpetuate expectations that child care should be inexpensive."
As the mother of a young child and the teacher of teenage women, I've thought a good bit about paying babysitters low fees. What "perpetuate[s] expectations that child care should be inexpensive" is that mothers themselves - even those of us who consider ourselves somewhat enlightened - undervalue the nurturing of children. We prove this when we pay low wages to the next generation of mothers - teenage babysitters. From these low wages, what do these teens in our capitalist society learn? They learn that
nurturing children is not valuable work.
The fees paid child-care workers will never rise as they should until all women value the nurturing of their own children - whether that nurturing is done by themselves or by others. Barbara Mooney, Los Angeles Immigration depletes resources
Regarding the interview with Ben Wattenberg, "Immigration as an Economic Engine," March 27: Mr. Wattenberg, in arguing for increased immigration, seems to assume that our resources are infinite. How urban must the country become, how low must our standard of living drop, before the Ben Wattenbergs realize that not all resources are infinite?
The population of the US grew 10 percent in the last 10 years. The large majority of this increase was attributable to immigration. Immigrants consume resources here much faster on average than they did in their countries of origin. In addition, immigration does nothing to decrease the rapid population growth in those countries which are causing world population to increase by 90 million per year. Elizabeth Hernandez, Las Cruces, N.M.