To The Editor:
There are people around town and across the nation who are trying to bring attention to the fact that corporations are donating huge sums of money to politicians' campaigns. This is of course to buy influence from that candidate or his party. Basically, they are correct but they are not being totally honest about what is going on either.
If the truth be known they would find that generally these corporations actually donate to each party or each candidate and allow them to disseminate the money how they choose. And, by this method, no matter which party or person wins, so do they. Or so they hope.
But let's look at what really wins elections volunteers, who canvas the neighborhoods and stand at the polls. Tens of thousands of these people are the backbone of a successful campaign and there is not enough money to buy that kind of support.
And, creating this kind of "grass-root" support is where the use of the public sector unions comes into the picture. The unions not only have a chosen party (the Dems) that have historically represented them but the Dems' candidates meet their financial expectations also. They trade votes for sweetening public employees' salaries and benefits.
How many times have we seen the fireman and our poor underpaid teachers standing on corners, visiting homes and standing at the voting places campaigning for their candidate?
Imagine how many voters the teachers reach through the propaganda delivered to homes via their students. How influential is a fireman wearing his "hero" hat and rubber boots while standing on the street corners begging for votes?
Yeah, corporations donate to candidates but the vote-getting ability of the public-sector unions is staggering. And, just what is the bottom-line agenda of those unions? Do you think their agendas favor the taxpayers?