Facebook Twitter

Full disclosure no answer

SHARE Full disclosure no answer

I strongly disagree with your position regarding campaign-finance reform (Finance reform's rocky road, July 18). Our current system is seriously flawed, and Sen. Bob Bennett's proposal to open the floodgates even more will only make the situation worse.

As it is, the high cost of running an effective campaign forces candidates and lawmakers to spend much of their time chasing the money and making themselves vulnerable to special-interest influence.

I fail to see how "full disclosure of unlimited donations on the Internet" will change the situation. How can "the jury of public opinion" hold candidates accountable when they are forced to participate in the current campaign-finance system if they want to win?

We need real campaign-finance reform that will level the playing field, limit the cost of campaigns, control special-interest influence and encourage more good people to run for office.

"The Clean Money, Clean Elections Act," which has been sponsored in Congress, addresses these issues. Maine, Vermont and Arizona have already successfully implemented similar systems.

A Clean Money System would provide qualifying candidates, who voluntarily agree to limit their spending and reject contributions from special interest groups, a set amount of public funds to run for office. Candidates qualify for public funding by raising a high number of small contributions from voters in their districts.

We, the voters, can only let the ballot box speak for us when we have a viable option. Full disclosure is only part of the answer.

Christine G. Meecham

Salt Lake City