Editor:You’re right. We don’t”need our student fees beingused to buy pancakes and bagelsto get the word out abouta party’s platform.” (“Don’tshow me the money,” Feb. 9)That’s because no part ofthe student fee is used for anycandidate’s campaign activity-as is the whole point ofyour editorial, all this moneymust be raised by the candidatesthemselves.But perhaps you’re wrong.As you point out, electionsare often prohibitivelyexpensive. Part of this is theresult of a financial armsrace between the parties, butmuch of the expense is bornof the necessary difficulties oftrying to campaign to 29,000far-dispersed students.These difficulties won’tgo away by simply cuttingcampaign timeframes orspending limits. Indeed, thiswould make it even harder toincrease student involvementin elections.The solution, perhaps,could be the one offered bythe national political reformersyou mention: publicfinancing.Instead of magically believingthat politics can existwithout money, let’s try toequalize access to that money.Just as in the U.S. presidentialrace, let’s give each candidatefor the final election equalfunds, and forbid raising orspending beyond this publicoffered,equally dispersedmoney.Perhaps then even thenoble yet cash-strappedChrony writers could mounta successful ASUU politicalcampaign.But then again, perhaps not.P.S. There are 67 offices upfor election: president, vicepresident, senior class andthe 64 Senate and Assemblyseats-not 65 as written.Travis CurritSophomore, History