In his most recent Sunday column, “A do-nothing philosophy,” Jim Gaines suggests that the absence of action leads to inaction, and sometimes to death.

He is correct when inaction is a result of personal irresponsibility. But he is off the mark when he suggests that the brand of presidential inaction that respects individual independence is somehow irresponsible.

To help make his point, Gaines derides a remarkable president, Calvin Coolidge, calling him “a champion of inaction.” In fact, Coolidge’s laissez-faire philosophy seeded the “The Roaring 1920s,” a magnificent boom in prosperity that occurred when he moved the federal government out of the way of economic development. His inaugural address contained just 102 words, telling Americans they should not expect his administration to “build up the weak by bringing down the strong.” Coolidge reduced taxes for all taxpayers so they would have more money to save and spend.

He signed legislation in 1924 and 1926 reducing the top tax rate from 50 percent to 25 percent. In 1924, his first “inactive” year of office, he reorganized the Foreign Service, investigated the corrupt “Teapot Dome” scandal, repealed many nuisance taxes, and passed new environmental restrictions.

Among 50 presidential vetoes, Coolidge stopped an unconstitutional bill to sell beer and wine that would have violated the 18th amendment and he refused to sign legislation which would have established a government corporation to buy surplus crops at artificially set prices.

As a result of Coolidge’s inactivity, real federal spending declined from $170 per person in 1920 to $70 in 1924 and unemployment reached 2 percent. The Harding-Coolidge years, 1920-1928, produced the most vibrant eight-year burst of manufacturing and innovation the United States had experienced to date.

Isn’t this the kind of presidential “inaction,” Mr. Gaines, the U.S. economy desperately needs today?

Chris Derry

Alvaton