I agree campaigns cost money, but cutting soft money won’t narrow the playing field to private billionaires with their own personal agendas in mind (“Special interest needed in politics,” SN 2/19).

I believe it will lower the financial platform of the political arena so more candidates who have limited campaign funds can participate in democracy. Remember, pocket size doesn’t equal political competency. It’s up to the voter to decide who is the best representative.

That’s why the cut will give a little room for the competency of the voter to grow by placing responsibility on us to seek the best representative through research instead of being spoon-fed expensive advertising campaigns.

That’s what soft money does. It allows the corporate-backed elite to serve themselves on a platter through traditional, expensive media mediums while voter apathy grows.

It’s easier than 10 years ago to look up your favorite candidate and know every fact of their agenda through use of the Internet, which is not possible via a 30-second commercial or five-minute sound bite.

If we’re willing to dust off our voting rights, then there is no better time to cut soft money and put our own special interest into the ballot box.

Bryan Plasters
chemistry senior