I expressed no opinion as to whether particular programs should be funded at the local, state or federal level, so you are attacking a straw man. I understand that you don't like federal programs, but that has nothing to do with whether the programs are socialized (government provided) or privatized (provided by a non-governmental entity such as a business or non-profit group).
*Here's just the first example that came to my mind: The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program works with cities, states, and local community-based organizations to provide services to an estimated 536,000 people each year who do not have sufficient health care coverage or financial resources to cope with HIV disease...Part A provides emergency assistance to Eligible Metropolitan Areas and Transitional Grant Areas that are most severely affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Part B provides grants to all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and 5 U.S. Pacific Territories or Associated Jurisdictions...." http://hab.hrsa.gov/abouthab/aboutprogram.html
Last edited by Hard Truth; 01-29-15 at 09:36 PM.
All the various donors don't bother me, but I remember when the Democrats yelled foul after the Supreme Court leveled the playing field by allowing businesses, as well as unions, to also contribute monies to an election effort, and they are now accepting money from them, from the very top on down. Obama stated he would stop the practice, but it's still in place and both sides take advantage of it. Do they influence how a person votes by using advertising to sway a voter's opinion one way or another, which is really the most important thing? Maybe not, as Soros learned in the midterms after giving millions to Democrat candidates.
What I think needs to be changed is the electoral college, which over-rules the individual voter, since it's winner-take-all by State. It could be 51-49 statistically, but it disenfranchises millions of voters, and I don't think that's fair. State elections are a matter of how many votes a candidate gets, which determines who won. Period. If there's a question, vote counting can be redone. The electoral college is outdated, IMO, since the reason for it has changed since it was put in place hundreds of years ago, due to TV and the internet being used to keep people updated on what's going on - things they did not have available to them back then.
Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
The Psychology of Persuasion