Campaign mail: What is it good for?

To the editor: Darry Sragow's comments highlight the real problem with American politics today: the ignorance of the voter. Why should anyone support a candidate or issue based solely on something in the mail? ("What do you call 7 lbs. of campaign mail for 3 voters?," Op-Ed, July 7)

In the past it was very difficult to obtain accurate information about a candidate. But today there is the Internet, and every candidate has a website. If there are any questions or doubts, a voter can email the campaign. Those messages might go unanswered, but not receiving a reply is reason enough to withhold support.


Of course, this requires effort. I suggest that The Times more clearly inform the public of this availability and encourage all voters to avail themselves of this useful information while, at the same time, ignoring the self-serving information from candidates.

This way, we might elect candidates who are interested in the voting public, not the wealthy who provide financing.

Joel Drum, Van Nuys


To the editor: Apropos of Sragow's article, I was driven crazy by the amount of political mail I received before the recent election. Each piece was so big that it all barely fit in my mailbox. And there were so many from each individual candidate. One piece of mail from each would have been sufficient.

They didn't help me decide who to vote for; they went right into the recycling bin.

Randi Spiegel, Marina del Rey