It is becoming more obvious as time passes, that, elected officials are no longer representing the American people, but rather, special interest groups. If things run their natural course, 5 of the people would make a million dollars a year, 5 others might make almost half a million a year, while 10 would only be making $10,000 a year, but most would be averaging around $30,000 a year. Now the socialists would cry to the heavens that some made more than others, but in their own town NOBODY would make more than $10,000 per year. The United States should attempt to spread democracy because people generally live better lives under democratic governments. Compared to inhabitants of nondemocracies, citizens of democracies enjoy greater individual liberty, political stability, freedom from governmental violence, enhanced quality of life, and a much lower risk of suffering a famine. Skeptics will immediately ask: Why should the United States attempt to improve the lives of non-Americans? Shouldn’t this country focus on its own problems and interests? There are at least three answers to these questions. The expansion of government in Sierra Leone’s post-war reconstruction era at local, national and international levels has resulted in increasing her influence on the life of the citizenry. Simultaneously with this expansion is the proliferation of official and semi official agencies, commissions and bureaus which continue to publish works such as directories, regulations, reports, bills, Acts and technical literature which many a researchers, educators, public service functionaries, welfare recipients and the unemployed can not do without reference to such publications. Since librarians serve as interface between users and government they have for long recognized the problems which such a plethora of collection can pose and have been making tremendous strides to address the issue. The essence here is to provide systematic controls to avoid the disappearance, into oblivion, of essential official publications. In deciding whether a statute is sufficiently certain and plain, the court must evaluate it from the standpoint of a person of ordinary intelligence who might be subject to its terms. A statute that fails to give such a person fair notice that the particular conduct is forbidden is indefinite and therefore void. Courts will not hold a person criminally responsible for conduct that could not reasonably be understood to be illegal. However, mere difficulty in understanding the meaning of the words used, or the Ambiguity of certain language, will not nullify a statute for vagueness. A recent example of this phenomenon emerged late last year in the debate over the electoral college. Advocates for eliminating the electoral college system were criticized by the republic-not-a-democracy crowd as being for democracy while those who wished to keep the electoral college described themselves as being in favor of the far-more-preferable republican style of government.