Our federal government has literally dozens of bureaus, departments, and commissions. But of all of those agencies, there is probably none who are as ?notorious? as the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the FBI. This is an agency who?s reason for being and daily challenges are so dangerous and exotic that we often see the FBI portrayed in movies and TV shows, and almost always heroically.

It is really amazing when you think about it that the FBI is actually a very old agency. And yet in its long history, the FBI has maintained a high public approval and regard for honesty and their single-minded focus on their purpose, which is to protect the American people. That is why when we think of the FBI we think of the words of their motto which is, “Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity”.

The actual history of the beginnings of the FBI date back to the turn of last century with a descendent of the French general Napoleon. The President at that time was Teddy Roosevelt and it was under his Attorney General that an agency known as the Bureau of Investigation (BOI) was established in 1908, almost 100 years ago. That Attorney General was Charles Joseph Bonaparte whose grandfather was Jerome Bonaparte, the brother of the famous Napoleon.

The name of the FBI went through several changes before settling in to what we know it as today. In 1932 it was renamed the United States Bureau of Investigation. Then in 1933, it was again renamed the Division of Investigation (DOI) because it had become part of the Bureau of Prohibition. Finally in 1935 it took on the name we know it as today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Just as the name of the FBI has gone through some changes, so has the focus of its mission. But this does not reflect a lack of vision on the part of the leadership of the FBI as much as it shows that the agency has continued to adapt and refocus as America?s enemies have changed. Over the years, the FBI has had some phenomenal successes in its war against those who would undermine the American way of life including?

. The most notorious and longest standing director of the FBI, J Edger Hoover lead a war on crime when gangsters and organized crime threatened the rule of law in this country. During his administration, the FBI killed or arrested such notorious mobsters as “Baby Face” Nelson, John Dillinger, “Machine Gun” Kelly, and “Ma” Barker.

. The FBI implemented a strategy to attack and slowly stop the infamous Klu Klux Klan from continuing their murderous and illegal activities across the south.

. In the 1920?s, the FBI arrested an entire army of Mexican revolutionaries who were massing on the nation?s border in California eliminating another threat to the American homeland.

. During World War II, the FBI had a pivotal role in that conflict when it broke up a cell of eight nazis where were working inside the borders of the United States planning acts of sabotage to reduce our ability to battle Hitler. Six of those Nazis were eventually put to death.

But the FBI has never rested on its successes. The mission of the agency has continued to grow and change even in the new century as the focus of our enemies has changed to the internet and the war on terror. That new focus has such a high priority that the top three official investigative priorities of the FBI are?

. To protect the United States from terrorist attack.
. To protect the United States against foreign intelligence operations and espionage.
. To protect the United States against cyber-based attacks and high-technology crimes.

Since the September 11th 2001 attacks, there have been dozens of instances where the FBI working with international and other US intelligence agencies stopped our terrorists from causing further loss of life and property in our nation. So whenever you hear of a great breakthrough in the war on terror or an arrest of one of our nation?s enemies, you can be sure that at the heart of that investigation was this hard working group of men and women, the FBI.

708

Government in any society is a complicated thing. In the United States, with our system of checks of balances between three powerful wings of central government layered on top of fifty individual state governments, each of which handles their checks and balances in an individual ways, our government which is summarized as ?of the people, by the people and for the people? has become a phenomenally complex thing.

After over two hundred years of history, it?s amazing to see that this government that rules the current America is still very much the product of those cornerstone documents that were written by the founding fathers, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and especially the Declaration of Independence. The national sense of self and that distinctively ?American? personality is very much interwoven with the bold statements in these documents.

For one thing, Americans have an intrinsic sense of their own rights and their ability to function separate from government. As such, government is never outside of the critical scrutiny of the people that it rules. While this seems perfectly normal to the citizens of this country, it is uncommon historically where government ruled with virtual absolute authority and the people were subservient to their leaders. To an American, the ones they elect to serve work for the public. And if they ever forget that or appear to be attempting to gather more power than they are allowed, it isn?t long before the leadership of the country is replaced. This ability of the people to peaceably ?throw the bums out? has kept government in check and constantly on edge for two centuries. And that is a good thing.

The Declaration of Independence would have to be considered a cornerstone of how our system of government works because along with independence from England, that document created a spirit of independence and pride in the American psyche that has influenced virtually every aspect of both public and private life. When America declared itself independent from England, it firmly entrenched into the soul of every American to never be dependent on any other country, government or ruler ever again.

To an outsider, the fierce dedication to freedom and self determination that is so deeply entrenched in American culture seems peculiar. But that fundamental conviction that we are a free people, not just of tyranny from without but free of oppression from within as well affects every aspect of American life. That sense of self will and self awareness is what makes American music, movies, cultural life and art to exciting and addictive around the world.

There was something buried in that bold declaration to the royalty of England that we would be an independent and free people that changed the personality of America forever. We did not just break away to be adrift from our point of origin, in this case The United Kingdom. Rather when we declared freedom, it was not just freedom FROM oppression and the dominance of government, it was freedom TO greatness that rose up out of the people, not from a government that was the keeper of the people.

The Declaration of Independence accomplished it?s short term goal of changing the culture of what was happening on the American mainland from a bold act of colonization into an even bolder building of a new nation. But accomplished so much more by putting a determination in the heart and soul of every American to never again be subjects of a government. Instead government in this new country would forever be the subject of the people, their servant and answerable to them. So Americans keep their government on a short leash, not the other way around. This is a revolutionary concept and one that has been working well for over 200 years becoming the envy of nations all around the world.

644

In the day in day out creation and enforcement of laws by our government and law enforcement officials, it is a common occurrence for an issue to come up that is layered with emotional and moral questions. At the legislative level even today, our government is wrestling with issues involving cloning and stem cell research and trying to find a middle ground between the ethical, moral and religious issues versus the scientific benefit that might come from the practice.

One of the great debates has been ongoing in American society over it?s history has been over whether it is moral and right to use the death penalty as a punishment for heinous crimes. Whether one is for abolishing this form of punishment or on the side of using it as a just outcome for a criminal, there is no question that the issue itself is a difficult one to decide.

The arguments for or against the death penalty are often not offered from a legal point of view. The positions taken by those both for and against the law fall under a few general classifications?

. The argument from morality against the death penalty. That it is immoral for a just society to take a life, even if it is of a criminal who themselves have taken life.

. The argument from morality for the death penalty. That it is just for the life of one convicted of a heinous crime to lose their lives as a proper outcome of that crime. That certain crimes should always be defined as so grievous that the one committing this crime must not continue to live and that it is the responsibility of the legal system to remove such individuals from society via the death penalty.

. The argument that the death penalty does or does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment.

. The argument that God calls for the death of the murderer under the ?and eye for an eye? statute from the Hebrew Old Testament.

. The argument that God calls for the forgiveness of even the murderer as part of the theology of the Christian New Testament.

. The argument from economy that it costs less to execute a criminal than to keep him or her in prison for life.

. The argument that the most heinous criminal could be rehabilitated to become a productive member of society.

. The argument from revenge, that the family of victims of heinous crimes deserve to see the killers of their loved ones executed.

. The argument from closure that for those same families and for society, seeing the death of a heinous criminal aids in the grief process by providing closure when we see the guilty properly punished.

It is easy to see why this issue is so emotionally charged and continues to be one of debate and dialog both at the governmental level and in political and religious circles.

It really isn?t rational to consider a law or the attempt by lawmakers to frame this issue into legislation as moral or immoral. In our representative form of government, those who would make laws have clear cut guidelines on how they will decide what will or will not become the law of the land.

The top level criteria for what becomes a law in this country is the will of the people. This can be difficult to determine especially in an issue that has fervent believers on both sides. The will of the people is not the sole criteria for a law as the electorate may not be aware of the legal grounds for a law or of the precedent in legal systems that were the background for our system of government. Again, reasons can be found in legal precedent that could be used to justify the legalization of the death penalty or the banning of it.

Finally law makers will turn to the consideration of the efficiency of a system of justice and in doing so try to determine if the death penalty is effective. There are almost as many studies to show that the death penalty does not reduce crime as show the opposite. It is similarly difficult to prove the executing criminals saves money compared to life in prison. But no matter what side of the issue we come down on, there is no question that this will be an ongoing debate in society for decades to come.

748

We depend on the government to pass laws that are good for the people of this great country. And many laws that get passed do a great job of that. But one requirement of a law to be of any benefit to people is that we, the people, must be able to understand it.

When it comes to this vast legal system called ?Medicare?, the best way we can compliment the work of our government in making it understandable is, ?Well, their hearts are in the right place.? Medicare is a system that was designed to help the elderly with their medical bills at a time of life when that help is needed the most. So, all cynicism aside, it is a system of laws that obeys that edit of seeing the government try to do the best for the people it serves.

But many of us find Medicare confusing. And when laws are confusing, it is easy to think that this was done on purpose to keep people from taking advantage of the system. In the case of Medicare, it is more likely that the system become complex because the medical system is itself complex due to the large amount of needs people have, especially in their senior years and the vast amount of options that the medical community puts at their disposal.

One good innovation that the government made standard in Medicare is that every citizen is automatically eligible as soon as they reach retirement age. There is no questioning on who qualifies because if you meet the requirement of citizenship, you have a chance to participate in the program. If we are seeking to simplify Medicare, we would have to first divide into three parts so we can separate what each part does and how it benefits the people it serves.

The first part of Medicare kicks in to cover hospital expenses in case there is need for that level of care. Medicare covers a wide range of services that you might need during hospitalization including room and meals, nursing and other hospital services that are needed during your time in the hospital. But the hospitalization benefit doesn?t end when you drive away from the building. Medicare also covers home health services you might need during recuperation as well as equipment such as wheelchairs and in home needs of the disabled and hospice services for care during end of life situations. Millions have benefited from this part of Medicare?s coverage so by itself it may justify the existence of Medicare.

You may have noticed that the first part of Medicare did not cover the actual medical costs of the care you receive. Part B of Medicare kicks in to help out with those costs. Under this second area of Medicare, doctors bills are covered as well medical procedures needed during your hospital stay, medicine, ambulance care if that is needed and even physical therapy the doctor may prescribe to aid in your recovery. Again, this aspect of Medicare has benefited millions of the citizens and it often very much needed for the elderly struggling with health issues.

For a long time all Medicare coverage fit into one of these two categories. But there has been significant work done on Medicare law of late. So in 2006, a third category was introduced to deal with the cost of prescription drugs. This is a good step forward giving Medicare recipients more choices in what drugs they need and who they will get them from.

There is little doubt that Medicare will continue to be updated and improved to serve the needs of the elderly population. Hopefully we will always be able to say that lawmakers have their hearts in the right place and that they are making laws that we can use and that we can understand as well.

648

When America young, if we could have put any sign on the shores of the country for any foreign government to read, it might have said ?No Kings Allowed!? The conviction was strong that this new country would never be a place where royalty dominated the people and were held up for worship as was the abuse in so many countries our forefathers came here to escape.

So many of the protections that were put in place in our founding documents were put there to assure that it would be virtually impossible for anyone to become king in this country. No matter how much power a politician or legislative body were able to amass, our system of government made sure that no one party, person or special interest group would be able to hold power forever and that no one could take over the government, stage a coup and change America into a tyrannical monarchy like we had left behind in Europe.

The separation of powers between the executive, the legislative and the judicial is one of the protections we have in place to make sure no single part of the government can arrest total power from the other two. And while this separation has lead to plenty of friction and battles between the branches of government, that is exactly the way it should be. Better to fight it out and have a government of shared power than to have one branch make all the decisions and rule like a king.

Just as important to the preservation of our unique governmental system is the use of term limits to restrict the extent to which a politician can ?take up residence? in a political office. We are most aware of term limits at the presidential level where we do not allow any one president to serve more than two terms. To some, that should be cut back to one term per president. But the term limit system will probably remain as it is for a long time to come.

This issue can generate a considerable amount of emotional debate. And of course, in a free society political debate is healthy too. How you feel about presidential term limits may have more to do with how much you do or don?t like the current president. If you like him (or her) a great deal, you would probably cheer for the abolition of term limits entirely. And if you oppose the current occupant of the white house, just one term is probably too much. There are some compelling reasons on both side of the argument.

We do trade away a certain amount of experience when we require by law that our current leadership retire after eight years. Each time a new president settles in to the white house, there is a time of learning while that new leadership gets organized and learns how to do this unusual job. Some would argue that forcing leadership from office may be undemocratic because it denies the people the right to return a president to office if he (or she) is doing a good job and should continue in leadership.

One visible downside of term limits is that when a politician is in their last term, there is a time of ?lame duck? leadership because that leader no longer has to work hard to win another election. That leader could become reckless and not provide the quality of service to the country that we expect from our leadership.

But our founding fathers wisely believed in the concept of citizen leadership. Their original vision for the presidency would be that a citizen would go to Washington and serve in the office for a season and then quietly return to private practice to let another citizen lead for a while. While our approach to ex-presidents doesn?t exactly fit that mold, our system is faithful to that vision.

Term limits keeps a constant flow of fresh leadership coming in. Some would say we should tighten term limits at the congressional and maybe even the judicial level. And there are merits to arguments on both sides of that issue. But we can say with assurance that term limits and the other provisions the founding founders put in place have kept our approach to government true to their vision of how this country would be run. And that means ?No Kings Allowed!?

737

In 1994 there was a government agency created that didn?t create a lot of scandal and to a large extent went unnoticed. But this government agency has made a huge contribution to the quality of life for all who get involved with it. It is the agency called Americorps created by the Clinton Administration to replicate the success of the Peace Corps to tap the power of national service to aid those in need across America.

There has been a lot of talk in the last decade about whether the current generation of young people are as ?great? as the generation who fought valiantly in World War II. What the Americorps experiment set out to learn was whether the current generation was as lazy and unpatriotic as was being said in the tabloids or if the current generation, given the chance, could themselves be the ?greatest generation? for our times.

The results have been phenomenal. Hundreds of thousands of young people have come forward to volunteer to serve their country and their fellow citizens through national service. National service is a concept that at one time was a core value to all Americans. At one time, children were taught that upon graduation from High School, every young person owed it to their country to serve at least two years of national service before starting family or their new careers.

What the Americorps experiment found out is that this value has not vanished from the American consciousness. Thousands of young people have flooded to Americorps in such numbers that there is a waiting list to get the chance to be of service. President Clinton?s vision to create an agency that would attempt to replicate the success of the Peace Corps of the sixties set a high standard for quality for Americorps to reach. The Peace Corps has become a standard that we all look to of an agency devoted singularly to contributing to the well being of our fellow man around the world and tapping the energy and good will of youth to accomplish this high goal. The stories of lives that have been changed of both those being helped and of volunteers to the Peace Corps are legionary.

What few know is that since 1961, 160,000 people have served in the Peace Corps. By comparison, since its inception in 1996, more than 200,000 have served in Americorps in hundreds of different capacities. Americorps has surpassed the model for a great example of national service and it has done so quietly, without fanfare and without the recognition that it deserves.

It is easy to recognize the good being done by a service based on the tapping the power of volunteerism in the nation?s youth. We have seen some dramatic examples of how Americans will pour out their service, their hard work, their physical resources and even their money to help their fellow Americans in times of need. Out of some of the most devastating events of our nation?s history such as the 911 attacks and the horror of Hurricane Katrina, we have witnessed some of the most touching moments of human compassion and social consciousness as neighbor reached out to neighbor to help those affected by terrible tragedy.

But it isn?t just the victims that are helped by services such as Americorps. Maybe the ones more blessed are the volunteers. They say that you get back far more than you give when you volunteer. The testimonies of those who have given some of their time to national service are solid proof of that theory. Young people in their late teens and early twenties are just beginning to define who they are and what they will become. By having some months or a few years where their lives are dedicated to helping others will instill a long-term commitment to service, to thinking of others rather than themselves and to patriotism.

The patriotism that takes root in our young people form their time in national service is not just the flag waving, song singing kind we see on display on July 4th. It is a patriotism that we saw in World War II in our soldiers and in our forefathers that gave all to make the country great. If national service can instill that kind of patriotism in our youth, we have no worries that America will not continue to be great for many decades to come.

743

The internet has sometimes been compared to the wild, wild west. Part of the reason for that is because in those early days of the frontier, the law was in place to protect citizens of the land but in many cases, it was hard to enforce and criminals ran free to defy laws without fear of being stopped.

When it comes to protecting our kids who go online, in a lot of ways it is the wild west out there. Are there laws on the books to protect our children from being assaulted by internet criminals who would do them harm? Of course there are. But enforcing those laws and catching every bad person who your child might encounter out there in cyberspace is a task that law enforcement is working hard to conquer. But they have not conquered it yet. So cyberspace is in many ways, an untamed frontier.

While we don?t want to go to the days of the wild west where vigilantes roamed the land enforcing brutal justice on criminals, we have to do something. The stories we hear on television and read in the newspapers about children being seduced and abducted right out from under the noses of parents are deeply frightening.

This may be the most troubling thing about cyber criminals who would harm our children. Because the internet is in our homes and even now spreading to the phones and electronic devices of our children, the access of strangers to our kids is virtually unlimited. Kids can get into chat rooms, use social networking services like MySpace and view all kinds of filth online all while mom and dad are just a few yards away watching the news. Because of this unprecedented access, new strategies have to be developed for law enforcement to protect our kids but also so we can partner with them to stop these evil people who would use this wonderful tool of the internet for evil purposes.

At a public level, we want to give our police and law enforcement officials all the help we can to crack down on cyber stalkers so the word goes out to such criminals that it is possible to be caught stalking children and if you are caught, it will be a harsh penalty for this kind of crime. Some have even called for the death penalty for people who stalk children online. How severe we as a society wish to treat crimes of this nature is something for our leaders to help us work through. But our first line of defense is enabling those we trust to protect us to find and lock up these criminals so these crimes can be stopped.

But at this time, we cannot expect law enforcement to be able to stop anyone from approach our children online. So we as parents share in the responsibility of making sure our homes are secure. Just as we put locks on the doors even though police are there to stop intruders, we must secure the internet so the chances of our kids becoming victims is minimized. The three strongest locks we can use to protect our families online are?

. Software. We can put software on our computers that will keep our kids out of web sites where these criminals may lurk. These ?Net Nanny? programs are inexpensive and effective.

. Knowledge. We must teach our children not to talk to strangers online any more than they would in a public place. Cyber stalkers are clever so we must be sure our children understand the risk and do not engage anyone they don?t know and trust online.

. Communication. Keeping the lines of communication open with our kids will assure that if they suspect they are being approached by a cyber stalker, they can come to their parents who can then alert the authorities.

It?s a shared effort to stop these criminals from having access to our children. But by working together with law enforcement and keeping those lines of communication open with our own kids, we can shut down their access to our children and so frustrate their ability to commit crimes against those we love the most.

704

When you are injured, getting a legal claim filed is not always the first thing on your mind. But this is one area that it seems the lawyers descend like vultures on anyone who is injured in any way at all. This is one way that the legal profession gets such a bad reputation. Seeing all of those ?ambulance chasers? and lawyers trying to talk us into filing malpractice claims on television is not a dignified way to portray any profession.

This whole area of malpractice can be pretty confusing to those of us outside of both the legal and the medical professions. But in a strict sense of the word, it may be something looking into if there is a clear case where a doctor either did not do their job or did it so poorly that it caused you additional pain and suffering or injury.

In that kind of situation, you may incur lots of additional medical expenses getting qualified help from an injury caused by a doctor who just didn?t do his or her job right. So it seems only right that the malpractice laws would be there to protect us from being victimized by doctors who were not doing their best to make you better.

The problem is, when it comes to using the malpractice laws to seek some satisfaction for a bad medical situation, it can get quite confusing. The first thing that might help get some definition of what constitutes malpractice is to understand the categories. There are five general types of medical error or ?malfeasance? that can throw your case into the category of malpractice. It might be malpractice?

* If the doctor is not able to diagnose your illness or does so incorrectly.
* If the doctor or medical facility is too slow in providing medical care resulting in further medical problems for you.
* If the doctor fails to perform a medical procedure that is what you need to recover from injury or illness.
* If mistakes were made in prescribing the right medication or prescribing medication that is harmful to you.
* If the doctor fails to explain what needs to be done or is negligent in warning you of negative side effects of your treatment.

If you have suffered any kind of negative outcome that is directly related to your medical treatment on top of your original problem, it?s not too hard to fit what happened to you into this category. If you are a genuine victim of medical malpractice, identifying that is not always the most difficult part of the problem though. The most difficult part may be deciding what to do about it.

This is where that ?ambulance chaser? aspect of the legal profession can be as much trouble as they can be of help. To make a decision about whether the potential outcome of a malpractice suit is worth the effort, you need a nonbiased viewpoint and advice based on the extent of your grievance and injury and how much you need the resolution to continue your recovery. When a lawyer or law firm pursues you so relentlessly to get a malpractice lawsuit going or they advertise to get that kind of business, you get the idea they are not looking after your best interest but their own.

Whatever they try to tell you, malpractice legal actions are not as easy to win as they might seem. There is a lot of burden or proof. So if you feel you have a case, the best thing is to work with legal advisors whom you trust and know they are not going to guide you to an action that is not in your best interest. Sometimes just using that lawyer to negotiate a resolution with the doctor is the best way to go.

647

Few know that the internet was actually started as a government project. It was created by the department of defense as a way of protecting our government?s infrastructure by decentralizing the computing power to many computers rather than one. But there is no question that the government has benefited from the move toward electronic records.

Over the last decade, the government has made great strides in putting virtually all of our public records into electronic data bases. While not all of them can be accessed freely due to privacy issues, many of them can be searched by citizens which has introduced an era of open access to public documents that was unimaginable before. The variety of types of public records that are either fully available or are in the process of being converted to online access is amazing including?

* Marriage records
* Birth records
* Death records
* Sex offender records
* Court records
* Bankruptcy records
* Missing persons records
* Census records
* Credit information

These extensive databases provide a tremendous resource to the public for a large variety of information needs. For a business, it speeds up the process of validating information about a potential employees. Before we had online access, just confirming that a prospective employee is a legal resident, that his or her background information check out and to confirm that they don?t have a criminal record took an excessive amount of time and effort. It was so cumbersome that most employers didn?t take those steps which could easily lead to an employment mistake.

The government record that has gotten the most public attention of late is the National Sex Offender Registry. Because sex offenders live under restrictions as to where they can live, work and socialize even after they have served prison time, many people watch these records closely to assure that they don?t expose their children to risks if a sex offender were allowed to move into their neighborhood or into an apartment complex near the school.

The balance of the public?s right to safety and the individual?s right to privacy come into direct conflict with the public release of this kind of information that is on file with government records. While it will take some wise leadership for us to sort that one out, the availability of this much detailed data does make it possible for the public to stay better informed.

The census is a rich source of information, particularly to businesses looking to expand or for a new venture that is writing a business plan. The census provides detailed information about population shifts, concentration of population in certain cities and even in zones of particular cities that can be invaluable to a business looking to locate a service or retail outlet where the potential customer base has convenient access to those services. Census data can provide a framework for evaluating the wisdom of a potential business strategy.

The first step in making this vast data resource part of your research tools is to educate yourself in both what is available from the government records and how to access such records. There are commercial internet resources that will provide search tools to sifting through the huge amount of data available from the government such as http://www.government-records.com/. While these sources charge for the help they provide, that help may be just the thing you need to make the chore of learning how to use government records less difficult.

Google also provides a good search tool for finding information from government records. To access it, just click on ?Advanced Search? from the main Google home page. Scroll down to the bottom of that next page and you will see a link titled U.S. Government. That link will provide you with a search engine, driven by Google?s powerful search capabilities that will help you find what you need.

We can expect to see this resource expanded and made even more accessible in the years to come as the government?s drive to become automated continues. It is economical for the government, which saves tax dollars. Moreover, it places the vast information the government gathers at the fingertips of the public. And this is appropriate as it is the public that pays for government data gathering in the first place.

722

There is a humorous commercial that is shown from time to time in which a rather funny character does his pitch wearing a suit that is covered with question marks and dollar signs. The man is pretty funny looking in his own right. But the upshot of the pitch is that you can buy a book from him that will tell you how to get ?free money from the government?.

Of course, the book itself is not free and the chances are that the business and/or the pitchman make their living from selling that book and not from free money from anyone. But the reason that advertisement is appealing is that we have an urban myth that the government is overflowing with money that it is looking to give away if we can just know how to punch the right buttons. This is the mystique of the system more formally known as government grants.

When you do your homework, it turns out that the truth about government grants reveals a much different situation than the windfall of funds that they funny man in the question mark suit might lead us to believe. Now, it?s true that the federal government does issue dozens and dozens of grants for research and other community related causes each year.

Many of these grants are used to help small businesses get off the ground that might otherwise flounder. This is one of our government?s methods of leveling the playing field in the business world to give the little guy a chance to get started. But it is also a way for the government to get funds to worthy nonprofit efforts that have a mission statement that benefits the community or the culture at large.

Another insider?s trick that the man in the question mark suit doesn?t want you to know is that you can find out all you could ever want to know about government grants for free. The government wants you to know about these funds so they can find the most qualified businesses or nonprofit charities to help out. You can go directly to the government web site on grants and use their search engine. Use the .gov domain search tool on Google and you will find ample resources to guide you. Another great resource on the web is the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance which has the tools to find grants by topic and by your area of expertise,

The misconception that we get in our heads is that because these are ?grants?, there is no work to getting or using this governmental money. The process of applying for and competing to win a government grant can be just as much work as any job and perhaps even more frustrating because you are in competition with others for limited resources. Just as some people win at getting government grants, other people are not granted the money they seek. This is a part of the gamble of going after a government grant that you must reconcile yourself to before even you start the process.

Be prepared to be patient, learn about the steps and give each stage in the development of your application for the grant plenty of time and tender loving care. You will have to gain a good comprehension of the myriad of government agencies to find the one who would be most likely to look at you for a grant.

The process of filling out the grant paperwork and submitting your proposal is a discipline in its own right that you may even have to seek professional help to do well. But if you do well, use plenty of patience and your project is worthwhile, there is government out there to help you. You just have to take the time to learn how to go after it.

645