Letter: Campaign giving is legal bribery

The article on the millions of dollars spent by teachers unions and other groups to get their preferred candidates elected to the State Senate really should open Americans' eyes to a true failure of our democracy ["Big bets on education," News, Nov. 24].

American politics has increasingly become a legalized system of buying votes. Every election sees money "contributed" to candidates and their campaign funds by individuals and groups that want and expect candidates to vote a certain way. Bribery in America is illegal, yet spending in an effort to get someone elected is legal?

Countless millions of dollars are spent by lobbies and individuals to influence votes in venues like Congress. For example, drug companies and their lobbies contribute vast sums to our elected officials as decisions are made in Washington regarding legislation on hot topics like the cost of medications and drugs. I contribute to your campaign, and I can count on your vote? Does that sound about right?

How does this system really represent what is best for the people of America? Medicare is prohibited from negotiating prices on behalf of seniors, and no legislation is on the agenda to change that law despite the growing number of seniors in America. Is it just a coincidence that drug companies and lobbies spend millions entertaining and "educating" elected officials?

Rich Adrian, Huntington

MTA fare and toll plan rankles

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority needs more money ["What riders may pay," News, Nov. 19]? Is this the same MTA that recently restored the weekend service to the West Hempstead branch ["After 4 years, quiet reopening," News, Nov. 23] and added back weekend service cuts on the Port Washington line?

Why were previous service cuts restored if the MTA truly needs more money? How can the commuter have confidence in the agency's decision-making process?

Continually raising fares is easy. Someone needs to make the tough decisions on streamlining service, union work rules, etc.

John Molesphini, Valley Stream

Eastern Island needs more rails

The future of eastern Long Island depends on the well-designed connectivity of a modern mass transportation system ["Cross-Sound rail link among plans eyed" [News, Nov. 7]. Such a system is presently in its earliest stage.

I support a high-speed rail connection from Long Island to New England via a bridge or tunnel. I'd also like to see a multiuse transportation hub in Riverhead connected to this bridge or tunnel, and to a light rail service into the Peconic Bay region.

The Enterprise Park at Calverton, where Grumman Corp. once built and tested military aircraft, should also connect to the hub via a rail spur, to provide commercial cargo transfers by air, rail and truck to eastern Long Island and the Northeast corridor. Connectivity is the future.

Jack McGreevy, Mattituck

Boxing coverage glorifies a risky sport

I can't even begin to count the number of articles Newsday has published over the years profiling the dangers of concussions and brain injuries in sports ["Knocked down but not out," Sports, Nov. 24].

So, in seeing the inordinate amount of coverage given these past few weeks to Long Island boxer Chris Algieri's welterweight title bout, I can't help but wonder, are you even aware that one possible result of this sport is that you could give your opponent a concussion?

Paul Gott, East Setauket

Patrol cars seem like accident magnets

The story "Patrol car in collision, officer hurt" [News, Nov. 21] prompted me to write. It seems I'm always reading about police cars being involved in accidents.

On a recent morning, I saw an officer merge into busy traffic with no signal and then change lanes, again without signaling.

I routinely see police officers talking on phones while driving. Shouldn't they set an example? Apparently not.

Richard Mordecai, Bay Shore

Teacher evaluation better in the past

When I was in school, there were no elaborate evaluation systems. Every now and again, an important person such as a principal would sit in on a class to evaluate the teacher. The evaluations were private and effective. They probably included the comments students were allowed to make at the end of the school year on how the subject was presented and the teacher's effectiveness.

This method worked for years. Students for the most part learned, scored well, continued their educations and moved on to being productive adults. Why change a really good thing?

Julie Newman, West Babylon