The “social experiment” known as the United States of America was birthed in an era rife

with corruption, much like that of our present situation. Contention was the euphemism of the

day, since there were rumblings of revolution all over the globe, and our struggle was the one

that would ignite the powder keg of the oppressed and enslaved people of the world against their

various oppressors. England, France, Spain, and others were exerting their power against their

respective colonies, while their monarchs imposed their will abroad, turning the peaceful

colonies into their proxies through which they could wage war on their personal vendettas.

Many of these Old World monarchies view for position, always taking where they could get

away with it, often at the expense of the other’s vassals, which had no real value to the monarch.

The land was the only real concern for them, since that is what netted them their riches, and they

could get another of their “subjects” to harvest them. This is the same picture we could paint of

today. This conflict is not waged by the literal monarchs of old, but by individuals and

organizations that act with impunity, trampling the freedoms so hard won by American patriots,

whose sacrifice is looked upon with horror and disdain, like a rotting corpse in a tragic murder in

broad daylight, where nothing and no one did anything to stop it. The special interest groups, the

minority causes in our nation, the so-called human and environmental advocates are merely the

symptom of the problem. Just as an individual who attempts to traverse a vast span of

wilderness without a compass, America has lost its bearing. America was built upon the

foundation of a moral society. In fact, John Adams stated, “Our Constitution was made only for

a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." If this

statement stands true, our only true way to regain our former greatness from the thugs of

liberalism is to reclaim the original premise of what we were built to be: a government of the

people, by the people, for the people (Lincoln). As highlighted by the recent litigation, the

2

conditions of our first revolutionary war are fast developing in our current society. The onus of

liberty is once again on the people’s shoulders. The current court case, mentioned above, Sissel

vs. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, litigated by the Pacific Legal Foundation on

behalf of businessman and veteran, Matt Sissel, is possibly the last nail in the coffin of the

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. This long disputed bill

has done much to erode our American society. Liberty has been taken in the form of the right to

choose. The only choice is pay exorbitantly for health insurance or pay exorbitantly for the

penalties that will be placed upon you, with the federal government freezing your assets and

garnishing your wages until you comply. Does that sound like the America that threw off the

bands of colonial oppression due to excessive taxes, such as the Currency Act, the Stamp Act,

the Mutiny Act, the Townshend Acts, and the Intolerable Acts? Robert Anson Heinlein, a writer

who wrote much on the idea of personal liberty, said, "There is no worse tyranny than to force a

man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.” For

this reason, the U.S. Constitution was written with certain safeguards in mind. The founding

fathers knew that the people would never submit to taxation without representation, so they

positioned an arm of the federal government among the people. This arm is supposed to be the

legislative branch, since they are elected by popular vote by the people in their respective

districts. Taxation was such a huge issue that more votes required to implement a taxation. This

drastically narrowed the margin of error in the discerning of the will of the people. Because of

this, the U.S. Constitution was endowed with an “Origination Clause,” declaring that all bills

having to do with taxation had to originate in the House of Representatives, the most populous

delegation of openly elected officials in the federal government. This was done purposefully,

since the House of Representatives was the closest to the general population, having homes in

3

the smaller districts and having more contact with their constituents than their less numerous

counterparts, the Senate. Since the inception of the House, the trend has been that of a separation

from the people, holding no benefit to the people, instead demonstrating a trend toward

corruption and indifference to the plight of their constituents, with the wiles of the special

interest lobbyists deafening their ears to the appeals of their people. They have become less

representatives and more figureheads and town criers, who march to the beat of the executive

branch’s drum, merely parroting the rhetoric they have been paid to endorse. Truly, the gift

blindeth the wise and perverteth the words of the righteous. (Exodus 23:4) With this in mind, we

look to the technological advances the once free market enterprise has afforded us. The ability to

converse with people around the country, as well as around the world, is available to those in

even the poorest of nations. Why then not return the government of the people, by the people,

and for the people back to the people? Both the Senate and the House of Representatives could

be facilitated by a technological solution, leaving them among their own constituents, thus

bridging the culture gap between Washington, D.C. and Mainstreet, America. This was largely

the desire of our founding fathers, since they sought to decentralize power in order to more

effectively rule the people. The Declaration of Independence states that the government only has

the authority to rule based on the consent of the governed. With the ability to realize the

founders’ dream more fully, in the decentralization of power to the point of governance, the

people, why would we not fulfill this impetus with action? The implementation of modern

technology to decentralize the elected members of the U.S. Congress would benefit the elected

officials, the individual states, the local constituents, local state economic infrastructure, and the

American public at large.

4

Decentralization is not a new idea. In fact, we can easily trace it back to at least the

1700s when our own government used it to create our republic. In all actuality, it can be traced

back to the time of Moses, where Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, saw the toll the centralized

approach of governance was taking on his son-in-law. In Exodus 18, Jethro admonished Moses

to decentralize the burden of responsibility for the judgment of the people, but only if God

approved (vs 23). This example is a succinct illustration of the very definition of

decentralization. While we are on the topic of definitions, the 11th Edition of the Merriam-

Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines decentralization as follows: 1) the dispersion or

distribution of functions and powers; specif: the delegation of power from a central authority to

regional and local authorities 2) the redistribution of population and industry from urban centers

to outlying areas. First, let us explore the details of these two definitions to get a better

understanding of this concept, just as we would exegete out a verse in an expository message to

gain a better understanding of what is truly meant by the syntax and grammar in a scriptural

passage.

This definition gives us a two-fold example of the effects of decentralization in both a

legislative facet and an economic facet, or we could basically add financial aspects to them both,

since both of these would result in the redistribution of finances to the respective areas in which

this was accomplished. The first definition refers to the governance of an area, signified by the

word “powers.” This could refer to the legislative process, judicial decisions, or even the

entrusting of executive powers, such as those invested in a state governor for circumstances

requiring immediate action like disaster relief, public defense, and stay of executions granted

based on merit. This concept of decentralization is built upon the dispersion or distribution of

these powers. The reason this is such an attractive concept was voiced by Aristotle when he

5

said, “The many are more incorruptible than the few; they are like the greater quantity of water

which is less easily corrupted than a little.” Power is not the only facet of governance mentioned

in the first definition. It also mentions the functions delineated to those powers. Now in our

society, we have several governmental tiers represented in local government. We have the

federal, the state, the county, and the municipal areas of governance. Just as a doctor with a

stethoscope can hear your heart better the closer he gets, the closer government is to the level of

the people, the better they can serve their constituents.

The second definition is very similar, and rightfully so, since it is defining the same

term. The second has a different perspective with which to drive the point home. This definition

has more to do with tangible assets as opposed to the intangible resources of power and function.

The specific tangibles represented here are people, or as the definition puts it “population,” and

industry, which is the natural progression of placing population in an area. Industry is the goods

and services that would naturally be demanded by the influx or redistribution of groups or

masses of people. If you look at this word in light of both of these definitions, they are

advocating a dispersion of power, the utility of wielding that power, manpower, and the

resources needed for the manpower. This is a pretty comprehensive idea in just the definition of

a single word, but that is exactly what the founding fathers intended. They believed that too

much power in too few hands would spontaneously breed corruption, greed, and all the other

vices we denigrate as people. Thomas Jefferson mimicked this premise when he said,

“Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with

power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”

With this definition in mind, there are several different arenas in which decentralization

would have an affect. The first of these arenas would be the most obvious realm of politics.

6

Imagine a world in which the leaders of a community were unaffected by the members of other

political communities, causing them to remain true to the people which they have sworn an oath,

to uphold their interests and not squander the people’s faith in their leadership and representative

capabilities. How many politicians who started out as honest, well-meaning delegates have been

caught by the mudslinging of other party members and thrust into conflicts they had no personal

stake in at the expense of their integrity? How many associations have tainted their personal

reputation, merely because the corruptness of one drives them to seek others’ culpability?

The second capacity in which decentralization would influence is similar to politics, but

is more concerned with its function, administration. When we look to a representative who is

able to meet the needs of the communities and families they exemplify, do we seek to choose

someone who is from outside the area to plead our causes? In the same fashion, would we

entrust the facilitation of our needs to someone who has no idea what those needs are, let alone

how to mitigate those obstacles effectively? This would also require the decentralization of the

fiscal office. Both the political and the administrative facets rely on the monetary means with

which to finance the functions and policies. There have been many legislative acts that have

been rendered moot by the merely defunding of the measure by the House Appropriations

Committee. This is the same effect decentralization of politics and administration would have

without the fiscal facets being involved. This allows us to understand the requisition of

autonomy in the fullest sense, since any restrictions placed upon the complete and utter control

of any of these assets would not truly be decentralized.

Following financial decentralization, the next in the progression would in the economic

sector. As the politics and administrative processes are funded, naturally more money is

dispersed bringing more economic growth to local societies (Akai and Sakata).

7

Finally, the last area to be decentralized would be the environmental aspects of the

region. Without the ability to utilize the natural resources God has given, the decentralization

process would be short lived. This is easily demonstrated by the restrictive regulations that have

been foisted upon American workers, costing billions of dollars in revenue, many people’s jobs,

and adding insult to injury, costing the local governance money by placing those that were

working and generating revenues on welfare, drawing from the system instead of contributing

towards it.

All of these allegations being put forward mean nothing and amount to nothing if the

problem cannot be mitigated, or resolved, by a vehicle capable of enacting this change. As

mentioned above, our technological advances allow this type of vehicle to be employed. The

only reason centralized government was necessary was the remoteness of the governing

assemblies and their inability to communicate effectively with the voting process, requiring a

dual residence of many of the delegates, but this is no longer the case. Many corporations, some

of which are more complex entities than our Congress, utilize a series of systems that allow them

internal security, a necessity due to industrial espionage, with the ability to access the vast

consumer base outside that internal network. These are called intranets and extranets. The

prefixes state largely to what the scope of these are referring, but to present it plainly removes all

confusion and possibility of miscommunication. Intranets are a network of informational

systems that are linked within a limited number of authorized users. This is something a

company uses to transmit data from one individual within an organization to another without the

possibility of intercept by a competitor. It requires internal monitoring by an internal regulatory

mechanism. These systems are closed systems, much like a closed circuit camera is not privy to

those outside of the room in which the monitors sit for that specific entity. This also allows for a

8

secure connection between partners within the organization as they discuss details candidly,

preventing account hacking and other ill-conceived notions commonly used to rob someone of

some type of information (Mitchell). The most enticing feature of this kind of closed system is

the ability to encrypt the data sent outside the organization, allowing for a greater degree of

success and less intercept from rival entities (Goldreich). Beyond that, there is the counterpart to

intranets, which are also required in any competitive environment, an extranet. The extranet is a

network that operates outside of the bounds of the organization’s intranet system, which allows

for information to be distributed to individuals outside the sphere of the organization. This

application is seen in the utilization of the World Wide Web, or the internet as we know it now.

The other technological advance that would need to be implemented would be video

teleconferencing. Programs such as Yahoo! chat and Skype have limited capabilities, but there

are other companies, who focus on this aspect for the purpose of marketing it to corporate

organizations, who would benefit from the gain in revenue from not having to arrange as many

travel arrangements, due to the immediacy and clarity with which they can communicate directly

with commercial partners. One such company is called TrueConf. This software interface is

specifically designed for large group meetings and is even capable of carrying this on across

various intranets and extranets, giving a variety of applications and places in which meetings can

be conducted, streamlining schedules and adding flexibility to itineraries for delegates across the

board. If you know anything about Congress, dialogue is an integral part of the legislative

process. TrueConf would retain the ability of delegates to wax eloquent as well as the all-

important audibility of the resulting votes (IT News Today). Beyond the ability to communicate

with their colleagues, the ability of the public to hear these speeches and react to the mindsets

revealed in the demagoguery could also be broadcasted to external decrypting repeater towers.

9

This retains the ability of the people to engage their government and its agents with a knowledge

of proceedings and accuracy of issues at hand. Decentralization does not have to mean

disinformation.

The benefits of decentralization are far-reaching, stretching, as we have stated, from the

delegates to the very place with which they need to reconnect, Mainstreet, America. Discussion

on these benefits will start with the envoys themselves, then follow in logical progression to the

states that sent them; the local constituents they represent; and finally, to the general populace

extending beyond that of the respective districts of America at large. As already stated, the first

benefit of this alteration to our congressional organization would be to our state emissaries. The

initial impact of this concept would allow the senators and representatives to gain a sense of

stabilization. The stabilization of not having to traverse the continent, often stripped of their

families, to attend ambiguous federal functions. Another aspect beneficial would be the loss of

focus on Washington, D.C. as a means to eliminate the entire hierarchal structure of the United

States with the detonation of a “misplaced” Russian “dirty bomb” or any one of several nuclear

devices that have been reported missing in the international community. Besides the thought of

terrorism, any other attacks could be thwarted by the locals, who are more likely to notice when

something is wrong in Hometown, America than some random federal official, who is a

transplant. These two senses of stabilization and safety should be all that is required to prompt

the senators and representatives to clamor for the initiation of these measures. Experience

teaches us that there is no true rest in an environment where safety and the concerns of one’s

family weigh heavily on a person. This lack of rest leads to fatigue, which leads to bad decisions

that have repercussions throughout the rest of his or her career and the rest of the existence of

this once great State of the Union.

10

The second group to prosper as a result of these measures would be the very instruments

of the delegate’s election. These people obviously support his or her administration and as such

are directly responsible for their rise to power. Furthermore, since they are the means to the

power, it would stand to reason they entrust him or her because they believe it is of the greatest

benefit, or in many cases the least harm, to them. The first avenue in which benefits would be

seen through the return of the delegate to their own districts would be the increase in the demand

for employment. Quite honestly, the demands for a staff to properly inform and assist one of

these men and women is considerably large. There are several staffs required to keep the reps

abreast of all the matters in which they are participating. Staffs are required for committees;

professional applications, where they draft legislation, write committee reports, plan hearings

and mark-ups, provide support to Members during committee sessions, floor debate, and

conference negotiations; and administrative functions, who handle all the logistics for hearings

and other committee meetings, maintain committee records, administer the committee's funds,

distribute documents, schedule and work with witnesses, answer mail and phone inquiries from

the public (C-SPAN). In that realm alone, imagine how much could be added to the education

on locals by the locals being part of the process, not to mention how many of our own local

college graduates could serve in a capacity that would most benefit their community and

themselves, since they would definitely have a vested interested in local affairs. In fact, the

impetus of locals to champion their own causes is a “no brainer,” since human nature drives us to

seek our own benefit. Even those in the labyrinth of bureaucracy, known as Washington, D.C.

make their own local agendas known to the incoming White House administrations (Preston).

Beyond the administrative process lies the physical security teams and measures that would be

employed as result. Specialized law enforcement and military tactical training would be taught

11

to local agencies, who would already be subsidized by local taxes already in place. This could

also make greater use of the National Guard forces training in the immediate vicinity, using tried

and true methods already being implemented on the battlefield (Ambinder). The strengthening

of the militias under state control is the strengthening of America’s military prowess as a whole,

much like the strengthening of a foundation makes the entire structure more sound. This

utilization of local security assets would also foster a sense of rapport between the agencies that

protect their representative and the citizens, since they would be one and the same (Services).

This increase in local earnings would also result in a boost in tax revenues at the local level,

allowing taxes to be lowered, since there would be a wider taxable base. This means that

because more people are earning money, more taxes could be collected. Because more taxes are

collected, a lower tax rate would be required to reach the same amount of revenue. Lower taxes

are a sure thing to improve your standing with your voter base. This increase in the revenues

gained through taxation would fill the coffers that provide the funding for improvements in the

community. This is another mechanism that increases employment opportunities as contracts are

written with local contractors to facilitate the completions of these projects. This upswing in the

number of jobs is sure to make the unemployment rate plummet, meaning fewer individuals and

families on welfare, reducing the drain on the local treasury, resulting in even more projects

being able to be funded (Rector). This one aspect of benefit would create a chain reaction of

exponential proportions if implemented, and this is only speaking of a single community. What

would the implications be for an expanded landscape on the county and district levels?

With all of the benefits described above, these are not yet the end of the benefits to locals.

The fact of the representative’s proximity to the voters has its own benefit. First, people trust

local officials more than if they were far removed from them as they are now (Rahm and

12

Rudolph). Just as it is easier to solicit a response from someone close to you than from someone

that is distant, as you have no doubt experienced if you have attempted to contact the corporate

level of an insurance company, it is easier to gain a response from a local representative that is

truly local. The reasons for this are the same as any other person. The closer in proximity one

is, the more they are likely to address any situations at hand. The proverb “out of sight, out of

mind” comes to mind. The result of this frequency of exposure to constituents tends to foster a

heightened sense of accountability to their voter component. This heightened sense of

accountability, or responsibility, makes them more proactive in tackling local concerns, resulting

from the greater amount of public awareness, since they live in and among the community

(Preston). This level of culpability tends to make one more conscious of their own behavior and

actions, inclining them to transparency and scrupulous behavior rather than corruption. This

specific point would reduce lobbying drastically, since the very premise of lobbying is that of

back room deals and huge payouts to solicit endorsements for endeavors that one would not

normally endorse. Besides that, the staff of lobbying firms would have to increase greatly,

requiring more money to the lobbyists and less kickback to those who are targeted by the

solicitors. This alone would demoralize the lobbying efforts of many of the special interest

groups. A third benefit to the locals, and the representative as well, would be the great amount

of satisfaction on the part of the voter base. With the demand of travel being greatly reduced, the

envoy could foster relationships with their man or woman of choice (Presentation Testing Inc.;

The Congressional Institute). With this ease of communication between the incumbent and his

voter block and less travel time, public events are easier to attend, giving the rep more face time

and rapport with the people, translating to a longer tenure in office unless otherwise legislated

shorter. Finally, closer proximity of emissaries translates to less expenditure by the state they are

13

employed in (Brudnick), once again reverting back into the local economy. With less travel, less

money is spent flying to and from events, not to mention the security details required to secure

them. There is also the relegation to only one residence. It does not take a genius to see that

paying for one house instead of two results in a higher quality of life for the rep and his family,

as well as a lower expenditure on the part of the people. This would once again translate into

more local and state improvement projects, such as roads, schools, grants, and conservation

programs.

Benefits of the people would obviously translate into that of the individual states as well,

since the people are the very building blocks of the towns, counties, and districts that make up

the states themselves. The benefits of the people are magnified at the state level. As stated

already, more jobs at the local level would exponentially be revealed in the amount of taxes

collected by the state government, in addition to the already benefited municipal and county

treasuries. Once more, this would require less taxation upon the general populace, but still allow

for the implementation of more employment (Moore). These factors attract emigrants from other

states boosting the need for construction, broadening the amount of taxable residents even

further. Consumed with the resultant bloom of infrastructure, quality of life in the state as a

whole will noticeably skyrocket. These residual effects are only secondary to the effect achieved

by inserting a representative into a particular community. The requisite applications of

technology and the infrastructure required to facilitate it would also be inserted, causing a sudden

technological upgrade in the local area. Beside the fact of residual improvements being made,

the representatives that live in a local community are more apt to vote for additional

improvements to be made from grants at the state and federal level. These comprehensive

14

updates also attract businesses to the area, who provide tax revenue, additional business being

conducted, and the reclaiming of fallow real estate back to usefulness.

The final piece of the puzzle to understanding the benefit of decentralization is how it

will benefit the American public at large. The first three words of the U.S. Constitution are “We

the People…” This was understood to mean that the people, not the representatives, had the final

word as to whether a legislative act would remain viable. This was because regardless of the

funding provided by Congress, the implementation of these measures was relegated to the

enforcers at the local level. As things stand now, we have devolved, governmentally speaking,

with ambiguous federal grants of new police cars and obsolete military grade armaments

securing the local police forces’ allegiance to the federal government instead of the people they

were meant to protect and serve. This is totalitarianism at its worst. Decentralization would

return us to the balance between the old Federalists and anti-Federalists of the 1780s. States and

more properly, their constituents would regain the ability to affect their own situation, because

just as our third president, Thomas Jefferson stated, “A government big enough to give you

everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have." The

people did not require the federal government, the federal government relied on the existence of

the people, for the funding of their armies, the payment of the delegates, the sending of

ambassadors to France. Why does the federal government think the people need them now?

Ronald Reagan, the Great Communicator, had this to say, in his first inaugural address, about the

so-called importance of the government in the lives of the people, “…government is not the

solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to

believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an

elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is

15

capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All

of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden.” This return of delegates to their

home districts and states would alleviate the funds being used there, now funding by the home

state would allow for the elimination of taxes for those purposes, requiring less money being

siphoned from the states and back into the states. This would give states a greater autonomy,

which is granted by the Constitution under the 10th amendment, but is seldom enforced by the

states and seldom adhered to by the executive branch. They will have cut the umbilical cords to

the federal system, since the extra money gained by increase in jobs and less money being paid

out will render the grants by the federal system moot, since the states will have less need for

these grants. They will be no more holden to stipulations attached to these grants, granting the

federal system less oversight and control over the states. There will be less bureaucratic “red

tape” to go through with the new found autonomy at the state level, allowing the states to rule

themselves and make empirical decisions on what goes on in their territory. Decentralization

would continue to render the people more powerful by funneling more of the money to the home

districts, which will be backed by the reps, who live in the districts, instead of the current

propensity to siphon it into Washington, D.C. Furthermore, lobbying will be all but debilitated,

since the former advantage of centralization would be gone. This would require lobbying offices

at least in every state, if not in every district, racking up billions of dollars in travel and

representation without even considering the “kickbacks” we mentioned above. The power of

the lobby would be much diminished simply by the war waged on their pocket books (Bardhan

and Mookherjee), leaving much of the congressional system untouched by the corruption that is

inherent in the practices involved (Fagan). The representative’s lack of contact with other

delegates will also allow them to remain true to the causes which they championed, backed by

16

the people they swore an oath to represent. This would result in a greater realization of

campaign trail integrity across the board, since one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. For

those who choose to take a stroll down the darksome path, the disenfranchised voter base will

more readily initiate referendums, recalls, and initiatives (Underhill), showing the disdain for

even the slightest skewing of representation, because when the people are ill represented, that by

definition is taxation without representation. The more visible a delegate is to their district, the

more the people will be proactive, with public awareness, which is a safeguard against corruption

on the official’s part, much like a guilty conscience to that of our own sin nature. The increase in

jobs allows for more spending on the part of the citizens, and the less taxes that have to be

collected, the more people tend to spend. As stated above, the goal is to return the people to their

rightful place and the federal government to its place of obscurity. The autonomy afforded

communities when the people are allowed to govern themselves, allowing states, districts,

counties, and municipalities to choose for themselves on issues that should not even be a

questions, like gun control, school reform, environmental sanctions, etc.

Decentralization has a vast array of benefits, as seen by the original design of our once

great State of the Union. This failure on the part of the American populace is reversible, to the

benefit of all involved. Have we had enough of the lies and games of the federal government

trying to legislate us into safety? Life is not safe! The federal government has no control of the

death of anyone. The Bible makes it clear in Hebrews 9:27 that God has set an appointment for

our death and judgment. Jethro had the right idea, this is clear because God obviously

sanctioned it. Let’s be wise and decentralize.

17

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akai, Nobuo and Masayo Sakata. "Fiscal Decntralization Contributes to Economic Growth: Evidence From State-Level Cross-Section Data for the United States." Journal of Urban Economics 52 (2001): 93-108. Print. 17 September 2014 . <http://www.geocities.co.jp/SilkRoad/3841/jue.pdf>.

Ambinder, Marc. "How to Protect Members of Congress." National Journal (2011). 20 September 2014. <http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/how-to-protect-members-of-congress-20110111>.

Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee. "Relative Capture of Local and Central Governments: An Essay in the Political Economy of Decentralization." Thesis. UC Berkeley, 2002. 20 September 2014. <http://escholarship.org/uc/item/9gx7t5hd?query=lobbying;hitNum=1#page-1>.

Brudnick, Ida A. Congressional Salaries and Allowances. Congressional Report. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 2014. 20 September 2014. <http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0E%2C*PL%5B%3D%23P%20%20%0A>.

C-SPAN. Congress. 15 November 2000. 20 September 2014. <http://legacy.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp>.

Fagan, Chris. What is ‘lobbying’ and its link to corruption? 14 September 2009. 21 September 2014. <http://blog.transparency.org/2009/09/14/what-is-%E2%80%98lobbying%E2%80%99-and-its-link-to-corruption/>.

Goldreich, Oded. Foundations of Cryptography: Vol. 2 Basic Applications. Vol. II . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

IT News Today. "The New Version of TrueConf Video Conferencing Software." 8 August 2013. IT News Today. 17 September 2014. <http://itnews2day.com/2013/08/08/trueconf-video-conferencing-server/>.

Lincoln, Abraham. "The Gettysburg Address." Gettysburg: Penguin Books, 19 November 1863. Address.

18

Mitchell, Bradley. "Intranet." n.d. About.com. 17 September 2014. <http://compnetworking.about.com/cs/intranets/g/bldef_intranet.htm>.

Moore, Stephen. "Low-Tax States Create More Jobs Than High-Tax States." 25 August 2014. The Heritage Foundation. 20 September 2014. <http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2014/8/low-tax-states-create-more-jobs-than-high-tax-states>.

Presentation Testing Inc.; The Congressional Institute. Helping a 221-Year-Old Institution Harness Cutting-Edge Communication Technologies: Research Findings to Enhance Congressional Contact with Constituents and the Media. The Congressional Institute. Alexandria, 2009-2010. 20 September 2014. <http://conginst.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/communicationproject2010.pdf>.

Preston, Mark. "Inside Washington: Locals Push Agenda to new White House." American City and County 1 February 2001. 18 September 2014. <http://americancityandcounty.com/mag/government_inside_washington_locals>.

Rahm, Wendy M. and Thomas J. Rudolph. "Chapter 13: Trust in Local Governments." Rahm, Wendy M. and Thomas J. Rudolph. A Tale of Political Trust in American Cities. Washington: CQ Press, 2002. 8-9. 20 September 2014. <http://elections.gmu.edu/Classes/GOVT311/NW_Chapter_13.pdf>.

Rector, Robert. "Obama’s End Run on Welfare Reform, Part One: Understanding Workfare." 19 September 2012. The Heritage Foundation. 20 September 2014. <http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/obamas-end-run-on-welfare-reform-part-one-understanding-workfare>.

Services, Office of Community Oriented Policing. Building Trust Between the Police and the Citizens They Serve. Internal Affairs Promising Practices Guide for Local Law Enforcement. United States Department of Justice. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Department of Justice, n.d. Government Document. 18 September 2014. <http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e080917232-BuildingTrust.pdf>.

Underhill, Wendy. Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. 2014. 21 September 2014. <http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/initiative-referendum-and-recall-overview.aspx>.