Money talks

-A A +A

Letter to the editor by Don Pixley

By Don Pixley

When the odds for a political election victory are determined, those who can raise the most money for their campaigns are usually favored.

We should not be so naïve as to believe that those who make large contributions are making them out of the goodness of their heart and that payment on their investment is secondary.

Among the largest contributors to the last campaign, the trial lawyers and pharmaceutical companies, are now realizing a return on their investments. Neither had much, if any, mention included in the health care law. Yet outlandish settlements for malpractice sits and the cost of prescription drugs are major expenses in the costs of health care.

Funds for major campaign contributors are a cost of doing business. So any such expenditure will be included in the price of their service or product. Then we as consumers pay for the campaigns.

A law limiting campaigns to about 30 days would spare us programming that wastes our time and all too often forces us to hit the mute button or endure a bunch of garbage. It would save countless dollars for those contributors that should eventually trickle down to the consumer.

Inasmuch as campaigning has developed into a full-time process even for elections years away and is fraught with what could realistically be deemed useless costly information, it seems reform is certainly in order.

Don Pixley