I agree as well. I do not believe the founders intended for the US government to become as influential as it has become today. I think a lot of people are against the health care reform proposed, because they feel that government is getting too involved in the lives of private citizens. But I also feel that the government should do something about the high health care costs and to put some form of regulation on it so it doesn't spiral out of control. After all, we have followed the Keynesian model now for 80 years, what is going to stop us now? :) I find it odd how my economic college textbooks discuss only the Keynesian model, while dismissing Hayak, the Chicago school, and the Austrian school of thought. I think the government has something to do with it... :)

---

Concerning the plutocracy, I see it more and more nowadays. Whether its Congressmen accepting money from lobbying groups to vote a particular way to the presidency being determined on who can trash talk the other candidate in more commercials so that Americans will vote against him or her, everything in our government revolves around money. The more money you have, the more power and influence you have. Look at the Kennedy's for instance. Look at where money got them. I can see the argument that you cannot win solely by having more money, in that you need to have other characteristics as well. However, money has a great influence not only in how influential a person can be, but also how they can change the views of Americans on a particular candidate all at the snap of a Benjamin. It is getting worse and worse, and I hope that someone can someday convey this to Americans.