Buying out democracy bad idea

(In response to Ben Morin’s Feb. 1 column, “Court Supports speech, money talks.”)

Mr. Morin’s assertion that “Money’s role in politics is not large enough,” is misguided.

The author would be wise to make himself aware of the 13.2 percent of people in poverty in 2008.

A single parent making under $18,000 may not have the desire to donate their precious resources to a candidate, when the parent’s first concern is to take care of their family. The only way this parent can support a candidate who holds their values and beliefs is with one of greatest responsibilities and gifts in a democratic society — a vote.

The author not only suggests allowing more money from special interests groups to pour into political campaigns, which will most certainly end up in more corruption in Washington, but taking a vote away from U.S. citizens because it penalizes “the more passionate and invested.”

Is going to the polls and voting not displaying adequate passion?

The 2008 election saw a major increase in online donations, President Barack Obama raised half a billion dollars through social networks.

With the floodgates open to freely fund political campaigns with any amount of money, Mr. Obama’s donations may look meager in the next presidential race.

Sorry, Mr. Morin, not everyone in this country can “make a meaningful contribution” other than their cherished vote.

Zach Levin-Epstein
Undergraduate

Rooting for Rush

(In response to Nicole Gilbert’s Tuesday column, “Miss America pageant makes poor judge choice.”)

Your “reporter” Nicole Gilbert wrote that Rush Limbaugh urged people not to send funds to help Haiti.

As has been addressed in every news organization except yours, Rush Limbaugh asked that, instead of people sending money for Haiti through the government, they should instead send money for Haiti to private charities to disburse, to avoid government bureaucrats from getting their hands on it.

Get your facts straight.

Kathy Rabenberg
Reader