Good points but I don't think that you read my second post. I would make certain that corporations don't have the ability to coerce the governments, state or federal, in any way. It would probably happen to a point but if any elected official were caught doing things that didn't benefit his or her constituents and instead benefits themselves, they would be considered criminals. The same way as if someone in a corporation were embezelling money. I think that the states lowering business taxes to compete for job creation in their state would be a positive thing. Again, i'm not all that well educated and i'm sure that my theory has holes, but the biggest thing that i'm advocating here is smaller federal government. Where in our constitution does it say that the federal government should have the ability to redistribute wealth? That, in a nutshell, is what some of the candidates are suggesting should they be elected. If you feel like you want to live in a semi-socialist society, move to California. I do agree that hunters and environmentalists can find common ground. The problem is the extremists on both sides. PETA thinks that if I shoot a deer or an elk, i'm evil. On the other hand, some hunters think that they need to shoot anything that moves and then waste all the meat. The reasonable sides of both arguments can get along fine. Oh and by the way, i'm well armed and grew up in the wilderness. If all hell breaks loose, my family will eat and be safe. Thank you for your concern though.