In response to David Broder`s July 4 column regarding the Supreme Court`s patronage decision:
To the extent that the two-party system and voter participation are in decline, could we not cite as a cause the common perception that the two major parties represent, not any particular ideologies, but the centralization of power and privilege? And has not political patronage contributed to that perception? And, in Chicago, has not patronage effectively created a one-party system in which voters have no meaningful choice at all?
Again, to the extent that a political party owes its efficacy to the disbursement of favors, rather than to its ideological appeal, I submit that it does not deserve to exist.