LETTERS: TAXPAYERS ALWAYS FOOT CAMPAIGN COSTS

To the editor:

I have never responded to your or anyone's editorial before, but your May 12 editorial, "Public campaign financing is a really bad idea," rocked my emotions. Either you are in la-la land, or I am.

Is this the land governed by the people and for the people, or is it actually governed by the richest politician for the corporations and special interests? I'm confident every citizen reading this letter can name at least three pork projects reported to us by this newspaper this year which cost us by the billion. We turn away and say, "Hey, what can we do? This and that corporation or special interest paid for the politician's re-election, and the politician must owe them. Other than that, he seems to be a pretty good governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state or such."

You wrote, "The very idea of gigging taxpayers is beyond comprehension." Well, where on Earth do you think these corporations get the money to pay off (excuse me, the term "pay off" is politically incorrect; I mean "donate") to the politicians' campaign? The working taxpayer.

Point in fact, I'm 46 years old. For 20 years I smoked. I identified with those healthy people on the ads, especially the Marlboro man. For the last eight years I've worked on quitting. What hurts most is the knowledge that some money from every pack I purchased for over two decades went for campaign financing to a politician to look the other way regarding what my chest X-ray looks like today.

Today, if you smoke, part of the money you work 40 or 50 hours a week for goes in these three directions: 1. To subsidize tobacco farmers. 2. To election campaigns for continued leniency. 3. To buy commercial spots for governmental anti-tobacco rhetoric.

I can name at least three other pork projects. Can you? You can vote. I do.

PAUL HERZBERGER

Cape Girardeau