Corporate voices versus individuals in elections

Re “So much cash, so few votes,” Opinion, Oct. 10

Giving money to political causes is considered a free-speech right of all citizens. The problem is that although corporations receive special treatment as business entities (such as lower tax rates), when it comes to the 1st Amendment, they are treated as individuals, giving them the right to contribute enormous sums of money that makes participation in elections by individuals increasingly meaningless.

The ultimate goal to bring back the individuals’ voice should be to either make corporations obey the same laws (including taxation) as individuals, or put into law that, for the purpose of elections, corporations -- not being individual citizens -- are not entitled to 1st Amendment rights.

DON KRAIG

Sylmar

*

The revelation that people who vote tend to be older and richer than nonvoters begs this question: Would it be less shocking to learn that voters and nonvoters are exactly alike, except on election day? If rich, old, white conservatives have formed an “exclusive electorate” that neglects everyone else’s problems, isn’t everyone else’s first problem the fact that they don’t vote?

Even self-exclusion qualifies as disenfranchisement. The secret’s in those noisy, confusing television ads: They suck the life out of the young and poor. The elders then march to the polls and, yet again, vote the will of their corporate masters. You could make a movie!

MICHAEL SMITH

Cynthiana, Ky.