The indigent aren’t being represented

Doesn’t it seem wrong to expect seniors, children and students to tighten their belts while Exxon-Mobile makes millions a day in profits, the top-10 hedge fund managers make $1 million in an hour, and Google, GE, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and several other large multinationals have more money in their treasuries than the U.S. government?

Wouldn’t you think that the top 1 percent of the population that controls 40 percent of the wealth in this country could chip in a little extra so that we could save the elderly and the children from economic hardships, and also invest in research for a better tomorrow?

Wouldn’t a strong America mean investment in food and water safety, infrastructure banks, alternative energy and conservation — and jobs resulting from these investments?

Why do we expect “the least of these” among us to bear the burden created by unscrupulous financial titans, now back in the driver’s seats and enjoying shocking bonuses? Why are we cutting food and water safety and scientific research in favor of tax cuts for that top 1 percent?

Could it be that the corporations and hedge fund managers can contribute unlimited, undisclosed money to the distorted, 30-second ads that pollute our airwaves before elections while the unemployed, foreclosed and indigent have little to invest in the campaigns of their representatives?

The 60 percent of Americans who want the well-heeled to chip in cannot get their voices heard above the cha-ching of the campaign bankrollers. Thus it seems laws are written to benefit the benefactors of our representatives and senators.

Where’s the free speech for those 60 percent? Is this really how a democracy should work?

Susan Spengler

Palatine