Mac and the PACs
To The Editors of The Crimson:
I read with interest Wednesday's article on the McNamara and Shamie campaigns. As a member of the Harvard Republican Club and one who has followed the McNamara effort quite closely. I was pleased to see the coverage yet concerned about the misleading slant of the article.
The "Big PAC Attack" headline, playing on the familiar McDonald's slogan, fails to accurately portray the sources of McNamara's campaign warchest. If anything the McNamara campaign should be presented as a "grass-roots" style effort. His contribution list includes over 30,000 contributors: their average contribution is $19. Only about 1.5 percent of McNamara's funds have come from PAC's.
O'Neill, on the other hand, is the true benefactor of special interest groups and other fatcats. Most of his $250,000 has come from PAC's. Individual contribution have donated the rest, but their average contribution is over $900. Who should be considered the candidate of "Big Money?"
It may seem I am bickering over mere details: I am not. The issue here highlights the differing philosophies of the two candidates. For The Crimson to paint McNamara as the candidate of special interests is not only untrue but unfair. Don't stereotype all Republicans as pawns of "Big Business." We deserve a break today! Mark Ramford '85