E. J. Dionne Jr.'s June 15 op-ed column, "Should Hillary Run?", approached its subject by posing these four questions to Democratic consultants: Can Hillary Clinton win? Will she hurt other Democrats, especially Al Gore? Will her candidacy promote Clinton fatigue and reopen the Clinton psychodrama? What has she got to lose?
As to the the primary inquiry (should Hillary run?), is it likely that Mrs. Clinton can effectively represent her constituents across New York State on legislation? What facts, in terms of her accomplishments or lack of same (not simply her views), support such a response?
The other questions Mr. Dionne raised, while interesting and valid, are directed at narrower concerns -- the welfare and success of the Democratic Party and Mrs. Clinton. Similarly, the past few months of newspaper, radio and television attention to the prospect of Mrs. Clinton's candidacy contain little, if any, exploration of what voters can use to assess what she brings to the job. While this void may be a disservice to Mrs. Clinton, there is no denying that it is a disservice to the rest of us.
I would like to see this disinclination by journalistics to examine Mrs. Clinton's record curtailed. Otherwise, should we not admit that the ability to get elected is the only qualification we care about? JULIAN TEPPER