Re your Feb. 26 editorial "Beware censorship in S.C.":
Cutting wasteful spending of tax money to buy something that is available on the free market is not censorship.
That is good stewardship of our tax money.
I don't care what the students at the College of Charleston read as long as they buy it, borrow it or read it in the grocery store checkout line. Just don't take the money I pay in taxes and buy something to give them and force them to read it.
I went to college, in a neighboring state, and I read some controversial books.
I was even involved in a battle with the college president over real censorship.
He tried to shut down the college newspaper for running an editorial critical of him. (The school president lost that battle, by the way, by way of a court decision.)
That is censorship - preventing something you don't like from being published. If it is not published, it is not available for anyone to read anywhere.
The book in question at the College of Charleston is available for about $8 on Amazon, and is even available in audio format for college students who can't read.
But all this is after the fact and after the tax money has been wasted.
Maybe the College of Charleston's business department could figure out a way for the school to survive without this $52,000 or so in state money.
Or maybe the school leaders could go to the Legislature and beg to get the money back in the budget if the next book they require all incoming freshmen to read is a Rush Limbaugh or Herman Cain book.
But of course if they did that it would be brainwashing, so forget about it.
Appropriate use of taxpayer money is critical to all citizens. A cost of $52,000 may be a rounding error to state politicians, but to some of us it is significant.
When anyone wastes money - even a little bit, a better use should be found for that "little bit."
That's not censorship; that is good financial management.
Notice about comments: