And so it begins: Operation 2016 Elections. The corporate media has never been more strategic in its manipulation of information to steer voters to either Democrats or Republicans. After all, the lion's share of the billions raised for campaigns goes to it. In fact, elections are the corporate media's bread and butter. Without the billions flowing to it during campaigns, it would not survive.

Corporate media and the two-party political system are intrinsically intertwined, relying completely on each other's capacities to deliver the maximum level of political division among voters during campaigns. It makes no difference which party the populace supports as long as it is Republican or Democrat. Both achieve this goal with no small amount of brilliance.

Not only has the corporate media achieved political polarization, it has also created a level of ignorance in America that is masterful in its precision. Every socioeconomic issue is framed in a political perspective, delivered to consumers (television, radio, print, Internet) using a conservative/liberal filter. Issues are rarely disseminated based on their merits or lack thereof. Instead, the majority of news is nothing more than informed speculation, giving Americans no real, measurable information upon which to form a meaningful opinion of our own. The result is a blind acceptance of the simpleton opinions of celebrities who could not find a solution in their pockets.

Meanwhile, politicians want us to believe that governance is deeply complex. It really isn't. The once-respected mission of government as an agency tasked with "representation of the people" has morphed into the current "continuity of government" (COG), a mission dedicated exclusively to itself at the expense of the people.

After reading your article about Iowa's gas tax, I thought of one thing the article never mentioned. If the tax shortfall is bad now, it will get even worse as electric cars such as the Chevrolet Volt and Nissan Leaf gain in popularity. I feel that the owners of these vehicles are cheating the state, as well as those who own gasoline-powered vehicles.

Instead of tax breaks, electric-vehicle owners should pay a surcharge on their registration. This way, everybody will pay their fair share of maintaining the infrastructure, as I have done with every car I've owned since 1972.

Pete Hess
Davenport

A newly formed group of self-described "center-left" Democrats claims to have secured $20 million in commitments to spend on state legislative races in Illinois.

But that $20 million apparently isn't meant to counter Republican Governor Bruce Rauner's infamous $20-million campaign stash, which he says will be used to support his allies and punish his enemies. Indeed, the Democratic group appears to be promoting what could be seen as a somewhat softer, neo-liberal version of Raunerism.

Illinoisans for Growth & Opportunity (ILGO) is not a traditional Democratic group. The press release announcing its launch blasted Democratic leadership, including former Governor Pat Quinn and both legislative leaders, for passing a budget last year "that they knew would create a financial crisis."

The group also bemoans the lack of manufacturing employment, the state's horrible credit rating, and its poor business-climate ratings without specifically endorsing any real-world fixes such as workers' compensation reform.

ILGO blames all these problems on unspecified "special interests" that have had "far too much influence with legislative majorities in setting public policy."

Buried deep within Governor Bruce Rauner's proposed budget plan for next fiscal year is yet another claimed "savings" that might not actually save any money, and could easily wind up costing the state more.

The governor proposes to save $108 million by discontinuing child-care services provided by relatives in the child's or relative's home.

At first glance, that cut might look prudent. Why should the state pay grandma to babysit her own grandkid? Is that some sort of scam? Go to any right-wing blog, and you'll occasionally see stories bashing this whole idea.

But those payments are designed to help low-income parents go to school and work their way out of poverty. So by pulling those payments, "grandma" could lose her income and may very well have to find a different part-time job, meaning the parent then has to search for another provider and the state saves no money.