COULD IT BE BECAUSE THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS IN BED WITH THE PRIVATE BANKING INDUSTRY?  IS THIS YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF CRONY "CRAPITIALISM" AND CORPORATE WELFARE RUN AMOK--

ALL AIDED AND ABETTED BY OUR SO-CALLED ELECTED "REPRESENTATIVES", WHO NOW INCREASINGLY REALLY REPRESENT THE SPECIAL INTERESTS OF THE WEALTHY CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS WHO NOW CAN BUY AND OWN "OUR" REPRESENTATIVES--

AFTER ALL MEANINGFUL LIMITS ON THE ABILITY OF WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS, TO BUY AND OWN POLITICIANS, WERE ELIMINATED BY THE REPUBLICAN-APPOINTED U.S. SUPREME COURT (SCOTUS) MAJORITY IN TWO RECENT SCOTUS DECISIONS--

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 558 U.S. 310 (2010)--a landmark U.S. constitutional law and corporate law case dealing with regulation of campaign spending by organizations, AND 

McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. ___ (2014)--which held contribution limits on campaign contributions violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. -- con't below