Reason.com

Print|Email|Single Page

Letters

(Page 2 of 2)

Rick Henderson replies: Mark Seecof is correct to note the inaccuracies that riddled journalism in the former Soviet Union, and that continue to plague state-run news media in other countries to this day. The American system of constitutional speech protections and our relatively free market should prevent the problems of concentration he is concerned about. If the Gannett chain decides it wants to buy an independent local newspaper, it doesn't execute the publisher and the editorial staff; it offers them money, which they can choose to accept or reject. As long as people are free to enter the marketplace, it doesn't matter how many media outlets Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner own; the truth will get out.

Republicrats Shun Reform

In "Not-So-Radical-Republicans," (July), Stephen Moore unfortunately focuses on the Republicans' failure to engage in serious budget cutting. This criticism is valid. The budget reflects a principle of governance--from the conservative view, that of a lean, minimally intrusive government--not an end in itself.

The 1997 budget agreement showed clearly that the Republicans in Congress are in essence no different from the Democrats when it comes to the expansion of government and the redistribution of income. For all practical purposes, we have a one-party system in this country, one in which the personal power and job security of incumbents takes precedence over the best interests of those who elected them.

While Moore suggests that term limits and tax limitation measures would bring about necessary institutional change, he does not say how to achieve these reforms. Indeed, in talking about changing the rules of the game, rather than trying to outplay the other side, Moore seems oblivious to the fact that there is no other side. Not only are the Republicans in Congress no more interested than the Democrats in term limits and tax limitation measures--or in campaign finance reform, which Moore does not mention--but members of both parties are doing whatever they can to solidify their positions against challenge.

For example, it appears to be a bipartisan belief that it is not in the public interest to provide free broadcast time for candidates who are not from one of the "major" parties. I find it difficult to believe that true reform is possible without a thorough reform of both intra-party governance and ballot access at the state and local level. Unless there can be a grass-roots takeover of the party machinery on a broad scale (which the religious right has begun to do effectively), and a real threat from a third party that is able to attract viable candidates, we will find ourselves yielding more and more of our wealth and our autonomy to government authority.

Richard Lange
Rockhall, MD

Page: 12

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

nfl jerseys|11.15.10 @ 7:51PM|

cryhxt

Related Articles (Immigration, Media, Congress, Welfare)

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:


(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245