Letter to the editor - Candidate with most money will win race
"One party is as bad as another"! Is it? The Republican Party is still the party of less
government, stronger conservative values and free enterprise. The Democrat Party
upholds its tradition of big government, liberal values, high taxes, and regulations that
strangle economic growth. Norman Thomas, who ran six times as the Socialist Party
candidate for President, said in 1944, "I no longer need to run as a Presidential
Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform."
Perhaps the parties need to adopt names that better describe their philosophies: the
Republican/Constitution Party and the Democrat/Socialist Party. Their platforms are
very different! The Republican Party understands the necessity to protect the U.S.
Constitution.
When elected officials arrive in Washington their hands are tied. They are left at the
mercy of the biggest contributors. Both parties are victims of this system. It cost over a
billion dollars to elect the last president. Until organizational funding of elections is
eliminated, we will not have integrity in government or the best interests of the people
served. Big money from out-of-state sources is destroying the spirit of representative
government. The candidate with the most money wins! Is this necessarily the best
representative?
Senator Tester's latest email states that he is supporting a constitutional amendment to
undo the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision. That decision gave
corporations the same power which unions have always had, i.e. to contribute to
elections. Tester goes on to state that "corporate interests should not have the power to
buy elections" and that there is "no transparency or accountability". One could substitute
the word "union" where he has "corporate". Is it fair for unions to take members' dues to
support candidates they might oppose? To level the playing field, the current double
standard must cease. If corporations are denied this right, then unions, PACs, and all
other organizational forms of campaign funding must be obliterated, also.
Gentlemanly debates, focused on issues of concern to all, have turned into nasty
exchanges of insults influenced by unlimited and uncontrolled PACs. This must be
eliminated if we are to restore a government of the people. The system is broken!
Hopefully Senator Tester will legislate to remove all monetary forms of influence that
have flawed the system! We learn much more from debates focusing on the issues than
from attack ads costing millions of dollars. Let debates be the venue for educating the
public!
Mimi and Irv Milheim
Dayton, MT