One man/one vote part 4

Since the beginnings of democracy, one issue has divided people; who has the right to vote? Is property ownership a necessary qualification for the franchise? For the past two hundred years or more, the trend has been toward universal adult citizen suffrage. That is until recently, when the Citizens United decision by the US Supreme Court gave the right to vote to money. Well not exactly, but elections are usually won by the side spending more money. The Citizens United decision has given us the present government of millionaires and billionaires in Washington, DC. It has set up the current contest for the governor of Illinois between two candidates who can afford to finance their own campaigns. Now attaining great wealth does require skill and some luck, but it is not the same skill set that leads to good government, as witness the current mess in Washington.

Now that I am retired and living on a fixed income, I can no longer afford to contribute generously to political campaigns. I feel that my voice and my vote no longer count as much as they did formerly when I could afford greater contributions. If one man/one vote is to mean anything in our democracy, a donor of $1 million should not have more influence than the donor of $10. We must reverse the Citizens United decision.

Trump must go