Kamapua'a wrote:

Sometimes I think the very core of ALL the issues... or at least the majority of them that American's argue over is based on money... pure money. And I'm almost convinced money buys you political positions. How many non-multimillionares have served as President in the last 20 years? How many senators? It has to be a very small handful. I watch here in SC as only the very cream of the crop go into government... hell, they are the only one's who can afford to. And then I wonder, "Where'd they get all that money?" Joe Pharmacey Hale Burton Rett Tirement

You may not remember due to your tender age but that's the problem that "matching funds" was supposed to solve. Now, one has to be filthy rich to get into a position to achieve enough support to qualify for matching funds.

Are there any other reasons for rendering unto the people the right to make all governmental decisions? (by allowing the registered voters to vote on every issue, every law, every appropriations bill). We've got the technology; we just have to exploit it. Yes, there will be problems, but they will never be solved until we start.

Tom Peters: "Ready, fire, aim"

I agree... more votes would solve problems. And even if it didn't... people could only blame themselves for not voting. Right now it's easy to point the finger at Washington... we could easily change that.

With all due respect to my American cousins, i have always thought, and assumed that the only way you can now get elected to the Presidency is if you are filthy rich, or you have very kind benefactors on whom you have done a deal with if you get elected. I have always felt this anomoly intrigued me in your politic system. I would love to see a truer form of Democracy, where someone can really be elected for their policies, and not from the backing of commercial interests or secular ones. On this issue on drugs, i would have thought that a bi partisan approach would have been adopted by the electorate to move this issue and other basic issues like health up the political agenda, instead of wasting billions on political manouevering in the Middle East, with the ensuing cost of war over there.

Mac33 wrote:

With all due respect to my American cousins, i have always thought, and assumed that the only way you can now get elected to the Presidency is if you are filthy rich, or you have very kind benefactors on whom you have done a deal with if you get elected. I have always felt this anomoly intrigued me in your politic system. I would love to see a truer form of Democracy, where someone can really be elected for their policies, and not from the backing of commercial interests or secular ones. On this issue on drugs, i would have thought that a bi partisan approach would have been adopted by the electorate to move this issue and other basic issues like health up the political agenda, instead of wasting billions on political manouevering in the Middle East, with the ensuing cost of war over there.

You're right... and that's what I was saying....

We need more REAL PEOPLE voting... not politician (money) voting.

More representation by the people... and the politicians should be the TRUE representation of them who do the major moving and shaking.

Hi,

I just noticed that Assembly Majority Leader Barbara E. Buckley, D, has introduced a bill, AB 195, that would let Nevadans order cheaper drugs from Canada via a state website. (cheaper is their word, not mine...)

More Info Supposed to be Here

I have mixed emotions about the government getting further into this issue. Somehow, things become worse when governments intervene.

Goes back to the principle that government people want to do the right thing, but they actually don't know how....

Very interesting Jake. As far as i am concerned, when it comes to a Nations Health, then i think this is one area where a government should have the mandate from the people to ensure the best health care is available to all its citizens, along with the minimum of costs for medication. When that happens, then you can truly say that a country has its priorities right. Charity should begin at home before looking further afield. A healthy nation is after all more productive and costs less in the long run. This is one of the few issues i think a government should interfere in for the benefit of the nation. There is also no reason why it shouldn't be free for everyone. All it takes is the political will.