Follow us:

Northwest Voices

Seattle Times letters to the editor

Category: Campaign finance
September 25, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Campaign finance: How to stop disproportionate influence from out-of-state donors

California billionaire Tom Steyer’s $1 million donation is another disconcerting example of how much money there is in our elections ["California billionaire Tom Steyer drops $1 million on WA elections," Politics Northwest, Sept. 22]. As reporter Jim Brunner points out, while Democrats receive large donations from an out-of-state climate activist, Republicans get large…

More

Comments | More in Campaign finance | Topics: campaign finance, Citizens United, climate change

May 12, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Initiative 1329: Restore democracy for the people, not the corporation

It was encouraging to see reporter Jim Brunner’s story in The Seattle Times on Initiative 1329 [“Initiative targets big money in politics,” Local News, May 9]. We — all of us — must collect 246,372 valid signatures before the end of June in order to ensure its place on the November ballot. When I…

More

Comments | More in Campaign finance | Topics: Citizens United, democracy, Initiative 1329

April 17, 2014 at 12:04 PM

McCutcheon v. FEC: Citizens can’t compete with Corporate America

Guest columnist William R. Maurer ends his guest column concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s McCutcheon ruling with the following statement, “ … for proponents of open and unrestrained political debate, the decision is something to celebrate.” [“Supreme Court McCutcheon ruling protects political speech,” Opinion, April 8] The Supreme Court’s McCutcheon decision will now allow…

More

Comments | More in Campaign finance, U.S. Supreme Court | Topics: James J. Farrell, McCutcheon ruling, U.S. Supreme Court

April 13, 2014 at 9:05 AM

McCutcheon v. FEC: a lazy electorate?; Democracy sold to highest bidder

If the rich decide elections, it’s due to a lazy electorate

Syndicated columnist Gail Collins seems to feel that because the Supreme Court has allowed larger political donations, the rich now have more leverage in political elections [“Surprise! The rich won one,” Opinion, April 6].

Hey, are any of us forced to base our votes on TV ads, billboards and bumper stickers? Do the Koch Brothers (or any other billionaires) force us to vote for the candidates they support?

Or do all citizens have the opportunity, not to mention the responsibility, to inform themselves regarding all the candidates and issues?

If the rich determine the elections, based on their donations, it is due only to the laziness of the rest of the voting public.

Richard Askren, Seattle

Democracy sold to the highest bidder

There is just something so unseemly, wrong and even slimy about the Supreme Court’s rulings on

More

Comments | More in Campaign finance | Topics: advertising, Don Curtis, Free speech

April 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM

McCutcheon v. FEC: A ruling for the wealthy few

The Supreme Court ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC directly conflicts with the First Amendment [“McCutcheon decision unravels campaign finance regulation,” Opinion, April 6]. The amendment states that no law should be made which would abridge the freedom of speech. In a large-scale society such as ours, this requires that all people be given equal…

More

Comments | More in Campaign finance | Topics: democracy, First Amendment, McCutcheon v. FEC

April 3, 2014 at 3:51 PM

McCutcheon v. FEC: Democracy is now dead

Ruling loosens reins on political donations” [Nation & World, April 2] should have been titled “Ruling severs reins …” The U.S. Supreme Court has done the nation a great favor: finally removing any doubt that our democracy is dead. What a huge relief. No longer do the vast majority of Americans need to cling…

More

Comments | More in Campaign finance, U.S. Supreme Court | Topics: campaign finance, Free speech, McCutcheon v. FEC