Laura Tyson
* Having read your article on Laura D’Andrea Tyson, (July 30), I felt compelled to express my disappointment. The author rightly concludes that the criticisms raised when Tyson was chosen to be the President’s top economic adviser appear to be “increasingly silly.” Nevertheless, much of the article is devoted to repeating those same tired criticisms.
Clearly, much of the flack raised by Tyson’s appointment has more to do with sour grapes than with economic philosophies. Laura Tyson is a woman who has had the audacity to rise to the top of her profession. She is a woman who has landed the top job in a field totally dominated by men. Apparently, that is a bitter pill for some of her colleagues to swallow, including some of her erstwhile friends.
Like other successful minorities, Tyson will invariably be held to a higher standard. The club of traditional economists from which past Presidents have picked their advisers will be looking for any opportunity to discredit Tyson.
Having worked closely with both the Clinton Administration and Congress to improve the economic well-being of California and the nation, I have found Tyson to be singularly qualified for the task of steering President Clinton’s economic ship of state. Clearly, what the President needs, and has in Laura Tyson, is an honest and plain-speaking economic adviser with a fresh outlook and new and innovative ideas on how to make America competitive in a world economy.
WILLIE L. BROWN JR.
Speaker of the Assembly
D-San Francisco
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
