READERS RESPOND

In the next presidential debate, mute microphone

Regarding the recent presidential debate, anyone who has ever participated in a video conference on Zoom knows that when people congregate for a meeting, there is a period of free conversation. When the meeting begins formally, everyone may be muted and only the moderator would be able to unmute one person at a time — the one person who has requested and been given permission to speak. Meanwhile, anyone who wants to address the group can write on “Chat.” Everyone can see the written message at the bottom of the screen, but no one has to pay attention to it. Should a speaker hog the microphone or become abusive, the leader can mute that speaker, giving others an opportunity to speak.

Moderator Chris Wallace could not persuade one candidate not to constantly interrupt the other candidate’s “two uninterrupted minutes” with shouted remarks that go on and on, often going far off the topic. Why didn’t Mr. Wallace simply turn off the microphone of the candidate who is not engaged in his own two minute turn? That enforcement of the debate rules to which both candidates previously agreed would be applied to either candidate unable to abide by his previous agreement (“Presidential debate commission making changes ‘to ensure a more orderly discussion’ after chaotic Trump-Biden contest,” Sept. 30).

Mr. Wallace was unable to handle the job. One hopes, for the benefit of the voting public, that his successors will do better.

Diana C. Schramm, Baltimore

Support campaign finance reform in Baltimore County

Almost everybody agrees: We must limit the corrupting influence of “big money” on the election process and, thus, the integrity of the decision-making process of our Baltimore County Council members and the county executive.

Voters will have that opportunity by approving Question A on the ballot (“Baltimore County, Anne Arundel and Howard: ballot questions,” Sept. 30). It would amend the county charter and create a commission to study and establish a procedure for voluntary public financing of campaigns starting in 2026. Montgomery, Howard and Prince Georges counties and Baltimore City voters have approved this fair process and the experience has been encouraging.

Wouldn’t it be refreshing if the most qualified candidates are elected regardless of financial backing? And wouldn’t it be reassuring if issues are decided on their merits rather than upon how much special interest money is spent to support candidates who favor or oppose those issues? We must try to eliminate the current system allowing lobbyists, heavy hitters and high rollers to “pay to play” or “politics as usual.”

I believe that this is the most important issue affecting elected decision-makers, as taking special interest money out of elections, and thereby the decision-making process, will surely result in far better decisions on almost every issue.

Baltimore County voters must seize this rare opportunity to pass the most important measure that will reform the way decisions are made and business is done in local government. Now is the time.

Howard J. Needle, Pikesville

Lawmakers have authority to add to the state budget

Your editorial, “Question 1: Vote ‘for’ constitutional amendment on state budget authority” (Sept. 28), endorsing an amendment to the constitutional budget provisions that have preserved Maryland’s AAA bond rating declares that “Maryland [legislators] have the authority to cut the budget but not to add money.” This is flatly and shockingly untrue; supplementary appropriations may be added for a single purpose therein stated if supported by a new revenue source.

A line-item veto, overridable by a partisan legislature is not an equivalent safeguard against irresponsible commitments. All states but one have balanced budget requirements but few have Maryland’s bond rating.

George W. Liebmann, Baltimore

Sin taxes won’t fix health care, but single-payer can

Here we go again — a proposal to fund state health care needs by an increase in sin taxes (“Maryland’s proposed alcohol tax increase,” Sept. 29). The head of the Maryland Distillers Guild is right. Higher taxes mean fewer purchases and more Marylanders out of work. It’s so unnecessary. The state’s health care needs, including those for resources in poorer communities, could be fully met by a sound, fair progressive tax imposed at the national level. It’s called single-payer or improved Medicare for All.

Roderick N. Ryon, Baltimore