Thank you for your article (July 5) and subsequent editorial (July 7) on the so-called Seagram's bill, introduced by Sen. Dills.
I could say many things about the odious special-interest pocket-lining at the root of this foul piece of legislation. Fortunately, your editorial said most of them already.
I was particularly enraged by Dills' suggestion that this was not a "consumer" issue (while sneaking in some good ol' "agin-the-rich" rhetoric). I know a man, long retired, among whose few pleasures in life is visiting a lady friend or two and bringing a bottle of good champagne. This man has not the benefit of Dills' dough; and now that decades of inflationary deficit spending have all but wiped out my friend's savings, Dills and his fellow shills now conspire to put his favorite bubbly forever out of reach.
BRADLEY C. WOOD