83 Percent of doctors have considered quitting over obamacare:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/

Poll shows 2/3 of Americans want health care law overturned

Recent poll by CBS News/New York Times shows two-thirds of Americans hope the Supreme Court justices will overturn some or all of Obamacare.

Article by "The Wasington Times"
Poll: Most Americans want full or partial overturn of health care law

Obamacare Goes To Court

I apologize to those who are sick and tired of hearing about healthcare.  Ok, not really.  The discussion on healthcare isn't over yet.  It was March 2010 when President Obama signed into law, The 'Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act', commonly known as Obamacare, and it is still being vehemently debated across the country.  Now it's time for the Supreme Court to way in.  For those who don't know a lot about U.S. government, our government is set up with three branches so that no one branch can make stupid laws.  If any of the three branches disagrees with a law, they have the means to stop it.  The Obamacare issue is a perfect example of this 'checks and balances system' in action.  Both houses of congress passed the bill.  The President signed it in to law, and now the Supreme Court must determine whether the law is constitutional or not.

We must keep in mind though, that this time the issue is not about healthcare at all.  It it is about the reach of the government's authority.  Specifically, the Supreme Court is to decide whether or not the federal government has the constitutional authority to force citizens to buy healthcare.  This is one of the requirements found in the bill.  This particular requirement is commonly known as The Personal Mandate.

US District Court Judge Roger Vinson has already heard the case in Florida and ruled that the individual mandate was both unconstitutional and that it could not be severed from the law.  He had the following to say about the issue, and I hope that the Supreme Court will keep this in mind when making their decision,

"I emphasized once before, but it bears repeating again: this case is not about whether the Act is wise or unwise legislation, or whether it will solve or exacerbate the myriad problems in our health care system. In fact, it is not really about our health care system at all. It is principally about our federalist system, and it raises very important issues regarding the Constitutional role of the federal government."

Note: A final ruling is not expected until June of this year.

Cell Phone Searches Without a Warrant

This story is a little over a week old, but still worth mentioning.  At the beginning of this month, the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ruled that is is now legal for police to search cell phones without a warrant.  Follow the link below to read story as published by CBS FWD.

Police Given Direct Line To Cell Phone Searches « CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

The TSA Keeps Us Safe

     By now, most people are well aware of the TSA's airport security procedures. For those who haven't been following the story, I shall briefly review. It started in March of 2011 when the Transportation Security Administration began implementing a new technology called Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT), or more commonly referred to as Full Body Scanners. These AIT scanners use low levels of radiation to create what looks like a nude image of the passenger. As you might expect, it didn't take long before people began objecting to the idea of strangers looking at their naked bodies. Although few passengers knew it at the time it was, and still is, possible to opt-out of the scan and receive the traditional pat-down instead. Then the TSA made another change. On November 1st 2011, the TSA changed the pat-down procedure to a much more aggressive pat-down that some say should be considered sexual assault. I don't know if the TSA ever gave a detailed explanation of how these 'enhanced pat-downs' are performed, but travelers who have received them have described them as follows: TSA agent uses the front of their hands instead of the back, runs their hands all the way up the passenger's inner thigh until they touch the genitals, as well as all around the breast, touching the breasts.

     Ok, now that everyone is up to date on the procedure, let's ask the important question. Does the TSA have the right to do this?

     I can see two ways of looking at it.  The first is that flying is a privilege, not a right.  So if you want the privilege of flying, then you're going to have to be groped.  If you don't like it, then don't fly.  This is the attitude the TSA has taken.
     The second way of looking at it is to consider that flying may actually be more than just a privilege.  In many ways, it is an essential part of our society.  How many people fly for their jobs?  If they were to quit and look for a new job, what are the possibilities of finding another that doesn't require them to fly.  What would it do to our economy if all fliers refused to to fly ever again?  What I'm getting at here is that flying is an integral part of our society, so we can't simply say, "If you don't like it, then don't fly."

   I understand that the TSA and Homeland Security care about us deeply and are only trying to protect us, but we have to decide, how much are we willing to sacrifice for security?  If they required a true strip search, rather than a virtual one, would be still be OK with it.  What if they began arresting anyone that seemed suspicious?  That would keep us safer, right?  So are we fine with that?  There is, however, one question that is even more important than "How much are we willing to sacrifice?" and that is, "Who gets to decide how much we are willing to sacrifice?"

Concealed Weapons Permit

Today I heard about a legislation in Arizona that caught my ear. This new law, if passed, would make it so citizens no longer need a permit in order to carry a concealed weapon. The legislation has already passed the House 36-19 and is now awaiting the Governor's final decision. There are two other states that already have similar laws. I became interested in this issue when I heard on the radio that my state, Utah, may be considering similar legislation. I haven't verified if this is true, but true or not, it is an issue that begs for debate. As yet, I am still undecided. This would be a major victory for personal rights, but it seems it could also carry possible safety risk. Those in favor of such laws argue that criminals can and will carry weapons regardless of the laws. I am interested in hearing what others think. Especially those who currently have a concealed carry permit, or those that are involved in law enforcement.

Read article here: http://www.ksl.com/?nid=157&sid=10317815

Socialized Healthcare Passes!

You can mark today in your diary as the day the United States offically started down the road to socialism. We have driven parts of this road from time to time, but now we have offically plotted the coarse into our GPS. Today, the House of Representatives voted 219-212 to accept and pass the bill that already passed the Senate back in December. President Obama is expected to sign it into law on Tuesday.

Speaker Pelosi said, "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." So I guess now that it's passed, we'd better find out what's in it, right? But that's not an easy task when the final bill is around 2000 pages and even the President's Chief Actuary tells the Republican leaders that he and his staff "will not be able to prepare our analysis within this very tight time frame, due to the complexity of the legislation."

Here are the few details I was able to glean from an Assiated Press article written today:

• Bans private insurances from denying coverage for preexisting conditions
• Bans private insurances from placing lifetime limits on policies
• Bans private insurances from cancelling policy if policy holder becomes ill
• Requires all americans to purchase health insurance, or be fined (first time in American history that a person has been required to purchase something in order to be a legal citizen)
• Subsidizes premiums for families with incomes up to $88,000 a year (if you make $88,000/yr then you should be able to afford insurance)
• Increases taxes for many health care providers (there goes mine and and my wife's raises)
• Adults without children can now get Medicaid
• Medicaid availble for those whose income is up to %33 percent above the poverty level
• Children can stay on parents plan until age 26 (get a job)
• Cuts over $500 billion from current Medicare coverage (in otherwards, Medicare won't cover as much as they use to)
  

According to Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich:

"The American people know you can't reduce health care costs by spending $1 trillion or raising taxes by more than one-half trillion dollars. The American people know that you cannot cut Medicare by over one-half trillion dollars without hurting seniors," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich.

"And, the American people know that you can't create an entirely new government entitlement program without exploding spending and the deficit."

Apparently our country's leadership doesn't "know" what we know.