A June 7 Kennebec Journal editorial railed about the “growing influence of corporate funds,” declining union influence and undesirable PAC influence. It ends by stating, “It will take a new generation of campaign finance laws to make sure that all voices are heard before the votes are cast.”

Unfortunately, the editorial writer has used a highly select set of facts in an apparent effort to mislead readers.

Carol Roux (letter, June 8) makes a number of provocative anti-Republican statements with lots of innuendo and little substantive fact. Her most egregious comments are reflected in the title, “Republicans trying to buy this election.”

So let’s consider some facts. The editorial writer states that we need “a new generation of campaign finance laws.” The implication is that the Supreme Court decision of Jan. 21, 2010, favors corporations.

The reality is that the decision specifically applies to both corporations and unions, as do other relevant court decisions. Is the editor telling us we need pro-union legislation?

As far as PACS are concerned, since 2010, Republican PACS have contributed approximately $11.5 million toward the upcoming presidential election while Democratic PACS have contributed approximately $13.1 million, according to the website: www.opensecrets.org. Tell me again why unions can’t compete.

As for corporate vs. union political contributions, OpenSecrets says, of the top 140 contributors from 1989 through 2012, corporations have contributed approximately $739 million, of which 40 percent went to Democrats, while unions contributed approximately $719 million, of which 87 percent went to Democrats.

It would be helpful if more of us, especially editorial writers, researched and based our points of view on unbiased factual data.

Charles Packard


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.