Summer Savings! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

What world does the Supreme Court live in?

Having read your recent editorial about the Supreme Court's upcoming ruling on campaign finance limits ("Another blow coming to campaign finance reform," Oct. 7), here's what I would tell the justices:

To Justice Antonin Scalia: Who do you think is going to be invited to a dinner with unlimited access to a candidate over the course of an evening — the 70,000 people who each gave $50, the 7,000 who each gave $500 or the one person who gave $3.5 million?

Don't you think $3.5 million is a heck of a lot of money? It seems to you fanciful to think that candidates will feel indebted to big donors? What world do you live in? A justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America so removed from reality as to be able to make statements such as those quoted above lives in rarefied circumstances, indeed.

To Chief Justice John Roberts: I consider $50 a "modest" contribution; how would you define a "modest" contribution? Would it seem fairer to you if, instead of making one contribution of $3.5 million to one candidate or political group, that person made seven "modest" contributions of $500,000 to each of seven candidates or groups? Or perhaps, 70 "modest" contributions of $50,000 each? Where would you draw the line, above which contributions become threats to the functioning of our political process?

To all the justices: You've already done your best to undermine the democratic process with the Citizens United ruling; continue down this road and see what happens to an oligarchy when all those people for whom $3.5 million is unimaginable wealth become completely disenchanted and irritable.

Diana C. Schramm, Baltimore

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Fee for ambulance ride is a mistake

    Fee for ambulance ride is a mistake

    I am writing in response to your editorial of July 22, "Ambulance fee, finally." In your editorial you comment about the decision by Baltimore County to begin charging a fee for emergency medical services and how it is long overdue.

  • EXIM limbo will hurt small businesses

    EXIM limbo will hurt small businesses

    I agree wholeheartedly with your July 27 editorial, "Revive Export-Import Bank," which rightly points out just how misguided it would be to sacrifice exports and jobs, as you wrote, "for the sake of laissez-faire purity." It is outrageous that House Republican leaders broke for recess without bringing...

  • Obama rewards criminals and stiffs law-abiding Americans

    Obama rewards criminals and stiffs law-abiding Americans

    President Barack Obama's effort to reward criminals by offering them Pell Grants is yet another reason why this country is going backward and is completely out of control! ("Obama Cabinet officials in Jessup to announce Pell grants for inmates," July 31.)

  • Is Verizon's anti-Baltimore bias legal?

    Is Verizon's anti-Baltimore bias legal?

    Verizon has persistently refused to bring FiOS to Baltimore, despite providing service to surrounding suburbs ("Baltimore remains a fiber desert,http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bs-ed-broadband-letter-20150730-story.html July 30). If broadband service now comes under the...

  • Baltimore must build something positive in the jail's place

    Baltimore must build something positive in the jail's place

    Gov. Larry Hogan's decision to close the Baltimore City jail was bold, but a good one ("Closing Baltimore's jail," Aug. 1).

  • Divert jail savings to rehabilitation programs

    Divert jail savings to rehabilitation programs

    While I was disappointed that Gov. Larry Hogan did not reach out to those of us who serve on the legislative commission dealing with the Baltimore City Detention Center or with me as the state senator who represents the area where the jail is located, I along with the residents of East Baltimore...

Comments
Loading
70°