RE: No merit

[Nina Powers <npowers@Home.com>]

Michael, regretfully you have misunderstood my message.

 1.You said-"If you truly believe...that big money is only behind one political party..." What I actually posted-"There has to be a cap on monetary donations to anyone running for public office."

I did not single out one party over the others to have limits placed on campaign donations. I would like caps on campaign donations and spending for ALL public office, local, State, and Federal elected public servants. Running for office should be about representing all the constituents in your district, not how much more money can be raised than any others to give you an edge.

 2.You said-"If the full extent of donations to the Democratic Party...were routinely publicized, the party of the common man would have alot of explaining to do." I specifically avoided naming either of the dominate parties in my message. I certainly cannot speak for the Democratic Party, I've never worked on a Democratic candidate's campaign, but in my opinion they would not be embarassed. And in fact, their donations are already publicized. In the Briefing Book section of this site is a link to the Center for Public Integrity.One can look up campaign contributions to numerous political candidates. You mention a stereotype of the Democrats as a party of the poor and the Republicans as a party of the rich. The CPI web site lists the TOP 25 CAREER CONTRIBUTORS for Al Gore, Democratic Presidential candidate.These career contributions range from the lowest, #1 at $48,000, to the highest,#25 at $148,200. Here's the link;

http://www.publicintegrity.org/reports/bop2000/gore_patrons.htm

The TOP 25 CAREER CONTRIBUTORS for George W. Bush, Republican Presidential candidate show a range from the lowest,#1 at $141,000, to the highest, #25 at $572,350. Twenty-three contributors donated more money to Bush than the top career money donated to Gore. Here's that link;

http://www.publicintegrity.org/reports/bop2000/bush_patrons.htm

 I don't think of the Democrats as the party of the common man either, but then I'm a woman.

 3.You asked-"Would you oppose the notion of women being able to freely choose which candidates they support and(if they have the financial means)how much money they could give those candidates?"

 It's not a notion, we've been allowed to participate in the political process for a few years now.In my 29 years of voting in local, State, and Federal elections, I've voted for candidates from the Democratic,Independant,Green,and Republican parties. I research the candidates and vote for who I feel will do the best job, irregardless of their party affiliation. I definitely oppose no limits on campaign contributions to candidates of your choice, that's what my message was about. I do not accept the notion that limits on monetary campaign contributions are limits on free speech. Limiting the amount of money I may contribute to a candidate does not limit my choice.