...the People The people who are able - in apparent violation of the law - to steer large blocks of "donations" and/or votes from the pulpit/the office of the CEO etc. into political campaigns or on "election" day.

Sometimes, their actions are completely inscrutable - like the Democratic "super majority" being unable to advance public health care (tried and true in 100% of other industrialized nations) - and instead funding a proven failure, "abstinence only" sex "education."

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-30-2009/democratic-super-majority 

Science has repeatedly demonstrated employing repeatable, verifyable and predictive means that "abstinence only" sex education fails to prevent unintended pregnancy and that physiologically correct sex education does indeed prevent unintended pregnancy. 

These facts make it appear that our "representatives" advancing "abstinence only" sex education either:

1. are responding to a clamor from their constituents for more unintended pregnancies or the continuation of a known ineffective approach to the problem of unintended pregnancies (no such constituent clamor is known),

2. have consciously chosen to advance a politically popular educational program ineffective policy at the expense of a proven effective one even though the People (primarily underage female children) will be hurt (naw - never happen - not our "representative"),

3. personally want to increase the rates of unintended pregnancy and or advance an ineffective policy (more constituents = more "donors?"),

4. have chosen to advance clearly ineffective (ostensibly) "faith-based" birth control techniques rather than physiologically correct birth control techniques proven effective by science (maybe our "representatives will get around to reading the first two clauses of that silly "Bill of Rights" thingy one of these days),

5. have received something of value in return for increasing the rates of unintended pregnancy and or advancing an ineffective policy (yeah right - that will be the day, LoL), or...  

6. who on earth can figure out what our "representatives" are trying to accomplish when they advance policies scientifically proven to result in an increase in the very thing they claim to want to prevent?

Anyone who has been watching how "money works" in the votes of our "representatives" knows that money and/or other things of value flowing into the asset pools of our (alleged) "representatives" combined with any and/or all of the above (each of which could also be accomplished through the cynical application of large amounts of money in service to a goal not in the interest of the American People) could be used to make ineffective sex education programs a major part of America's (apparently deathly ill) (and/or alleged) "democracy." 

Unfortunately, all too often our "representatives" appear all too susceptible to the "greasing of palms" (and other forms of mildly - and not so mildly - dishonest persuasion), and all too willing to do what is wrong for the American People - as long as it is "right" for the "representative" (and/or their chances in the next "election"). 

Precious few of our "representatives" appear to even consider doing anything that could be remotely interpreted as representation - and those that do often appear to be shut out of news reports etc. - making it appear that the true Representatives of the People do not even exist. 

So here we go again.  Significant time, effort and assets flushed down the proverbial tube in service to those who appear to doggedly (and apparently quite profitably) represent anything but the People of the United States. Many more young women will become unexpectedly pregnant, ever more thorough and definitive studies will demonstrate that "abstinence only" does not reduce unintended pregnancy, and the same old "representatives" will reintroduce (and perhaps again implement) proven ineffective "abstinence only" "educational" programs (and try to do away with the proven effective educational method) yet one more time. 

It kind of makes you wish there was hell or karma or something so that the folks who appear to do this kind of apparently unethical stuff in the here and now would get what was coming to them in the whatever comes next (if anything).  Perhaps they know the same thing freethinkers do - there is no afterlife so they have nothing to fear (and nothing to gain) from magical grandfatherly intelligent living things who somehow created all living things (how can an "intelligent designer" create living things if living things like the intelligent designer existed before the the creation of life?).   However, unlike most freethinkers, the people advancing "abstinence only" appear to have abandoned the ethical principles most humans appear to try to follow -and appear unaware (how could they be) that unintended pregnancies are much more likely to be terminated by abortion than planned pregnancies.   

The only way to ensure that our representatives have only the interests of the People of the United States in mind when they vote is to eliminate the system of "campaign financing" that allows our "representatives" to accept "donations," "gifts," "travel," and who knows what else from individuals, corporations and organizations (even foreign governments).  Until then, America's "representatives" will continue to accept things of value from those with direct conflicts of interest in their votes, creating the appearance of - and the opportunity for - bribery.