>George,
>
>>Larger (more) government doesn't necessarily equate with better services. If you just add on more beauracy without improving anything else, then you don't get better service.
>
>>By "less government" I mean that I don't want to have the government be intruding on my life. Things such as where I go on the Internet, etc.
>
>
>Well, as mentionend by both democrats and republicans it is not so much about the size of the government, but more on the effectiveness. IOW, what do you expect the governement does for you and how effective is it in achieving its goal. Reducing the size of the government just in sake of reducing costs can never be the right mechanism. First off all, you need to determine what the government does for you. For example.
>
>- Improvements/maintenance of Infrastructure
>- Basic healthcare service.
>- Security/Privacy protection
>- Disaster recovery plans
>- Military
>
>
>Then decide how much you of a priority it is. These decisions in itself will decide the size of your government. If you make this a part of a political campaign (preferably with more than 2 parties) you could better explain this to your citizens.
>
Walter,

There's one problem and it's in the explanation to the public. What you're assuming is that the explanation will be truthful and forthright.

Unfortunately, these days, a decision made by a "public servant" is often made based on "private interests". For example, the former head of FEMA got the position, not because of qualification, but because he was a friend of the President.