He's joking, right?

The Jan. 18 article "Lobby Curbs Gain Steam: Santorum Joins McCain Effort, GOP Lays Out Its Own Plan" shows how far Sen. Rick Santorum will stoop to win re-election.

Sen. Santorum states that he is joining forces with Sen. John McCain to revise lobbying regulations.

The irony is too blatant: Sen. Santorum was a large proponent of the K Street Project, the effort spearheaded by indicted Rep. Tom Delay and Republican lobbyist extraordinaire Jack Abramoff, and he has received more money from lobbyists than any other congressional candidate this election cycle.

Sen. Santorum thus asserts he is some kind of reformer. "I think I laid out a track record of reform that, maybe with the exception of John McCain on the Republican side, is unmatched by any other senator," he said. "I think I have done more to reform the House and Senate than just about anybody in this place and I was the logical person to go to" on lobbying restrictions.

Just who is he trying to kid? He resisted campaign finance reform legislation and has never failed to vote along the Republican party line, often ignoring the needs of ordinary Pennsylvania citizens in the process (see the Medicare plan).

Mr. Santorum's assertion that he has a record as a reformer is the biggest joke of all. What has he done that was so important? He led efforts "to make senators pay fair market value for their haircuts at the Capitol barbershop and in the Senate restaurant." Wow.

JAMES A. JAAP
Friendship

It is understandable that the PG is going to take every opportunity to promote the agenda of the left and disparage that of the right. But your editorial on the former attorney general's lobbying business is a cheap shot ("Lobbyist Ashcroft: The Former Attorney General Sets Up on K Street," Jan. 13).

I'm no fan of John Ashcroft, but as far as I know, what he has done is perfectly legal. And that some entities are willing to pay him for his services is, what, immoral? And no other attorney general has ever done something like this? So what? Have no other former attorneys general capitalized on their positions? Maybe not as lobbyists, but find me one who hasn't done so in some other fashion.

And is his behavior indecent? Has he sullied the reputation of the office? By what objective standard can you make these claims? What court, other than the one of biased personal opinion, would find anybody guilty of these charges?

Any halfway rational person, even on the left side of the aisle, who reads this editorial somewhat carefully, has to admit it is petty demagoguery. No wonder the press's credibility has sunk to the lows it has.

DOUGLAS R. CHAMBERS
Squirrel Hill