Your editorial endorsement of a bill in Congress to reduce taxes through corporate sponsorship of national parks projects gives new meaning to President Calvin Coolidge’s 1925 assertion that, “The business of America is business.”

We know that corporations are not charitable institutions. Their bottom line is profit; thus they will expect and receive some payoff. It is well known that campaign contributions to legislators often result in large benefits to corporate donors.

What can we expect from this new alliance? General Motors might well pony up for a flag atop Acadia’s Cadillac Mountain advertising their top of the line. New York Life is a natural for the Precipice Trail. Shell Oil might like Sand Beach. McDonalds might sponsor the arches of the carriage road bridges. Bald Peak could be very attractive to toupee makers. And the competition for Thunder Hole could be intense. The possibilities are endless.

Of course, the signs and flags noting corporate sponsorship would be discreet in size, tastefully done and placed so as not to block the views.

The proposal opens up whole new vistas for corporate financing of governmental responsibilities. The clothing of the homeless, who are highly visible in urban areas, might be emblazoned with large logos for L.L. Bean, Levis, and Reebok or Nike, much as sports figures are now.

In return, advertisers might help finance the welfare system. Archer Daniels Midland might be persuaded to underwrite the school lunch program in return for large advertising placards on the sides of school buses.

The visual pollution created by all this advertising might then spawn a whole new research industry to develop eye glasses which screen out advertising, much like the chip to protect children from internet pornography. That could be a real money maker. Edward F. Snyder Bar Harbor