Jeff Proctor

Your February 10th column on credit card issues and political contributions (“Our view on credit practices: Card issuers invest in D.C.“) is on the right track, but is a bit misguided.First of all, the money lent by credit card companies belongs to them.  Why should they be required to lend at certain rates or without particular fees?  There is no law saying that they have to lend their money in the first place.  If regulations get too tight, they will find something better to do with their money.

Secondly, I agree with the theme in the column that campaign donations may allow credit card issuers special access to politicians, but I do not place the full blame with the companies.  Politicians are the folks doling out the power in Washington–making special exceptions for companies who pay up!  Instead of regulating campaign contributions, we should try taking the power to do special favors away from the politicians.  It is, most certainly a two-way street.  For the past few years, the typical American reaction to the problem has been to restrict the size of campaign donations and eliminate sources that may have “too much influence” in the political process.

I suggest we take away the reasons that companies want to influence the political process.  Place more restrictions on the power that the government can give to companies, and you will see a dramatic reduction in the time and energy companies spend in Washington, D.C.