Obama proving no need for public financing

Given Obama's unique style of fundraising, I agree with his campaign's decision to forego public financing for the general election ("With Money, Obama to Try to Widen the Battleground," June 20).

A large portion of the contributions to the Obama campaign so far have been from individuals who have yet to exceed the $2,300 limit. His donors, with their repeating small contributions, have found a way to more directly express their political views than the public financing system provides. More than checking off a box on a tax return, Obama's style of fundraising has provided individual supporters - wealthy or not - with the chance to connect to a specific campaign. These small donors repeatedly donate to Obama because the campaign has made significant efforts to forge connections between the individual and the candidate. Not every candidate will be able to do what Obama has done, and justify a decision not to take public funding by referring to a mass of grassroots support. Here, Obama has substituted one kind of public financing for another.

With more money to tackle traditionally red states, the presidential election campaign could continue to draw in more voters than in previous elections. More states will be courted by both candidates, as Obama has the resources to take on states once perceived as firmly voting Republican. This development could mean that more people would feel they have a say in the outcome, rather than feel that their vote will be overshadowed by their state's traditional voting patterns.

Aya Barnea

Highland Park