A Liberties Czar? Bad Idea

In a break from our daily economics-related posts, I offer my letter to the editor of the New York Times.

A Liberties Czar? Bad Idea

To the Editor:

Re “How to Put Civil Liberties in the White House” (Op-Ed, June 30):

Geoffrey R. Stone argues that the federal government should create an official position dedicated to protecting civil liberties.

While Mr. Stone concedes that the federal government already has an attorney general and many other positions with the same responsibility, he misses a crucial problem: this new civil liberties watchdog would be another political appointee of the executive branch, thus likely to follow the wishes of his boss, the president.

As a presidential appointee, the new civil liberties supervisor would reflect the values of the president. His ideas about what is an appropriate level of liberty would probably not differ from the president’s.

Why should the federal government create a redundant position just to confirm the administration’s viewpoint?

If Americans are really concerned about civil liberties, they should elect officeholders who will uphold the Constitution without the urging of an unnecessary bureaucrat.

John Macek III
Worcester, Mass., June 30, 2008