Us citizen free speech not valid internationally

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSLNE7B700720111208?irpc=932

This article is about a us citizen who spoke out against the Thailand government in bangkok. They arrested him and sentenced him for 2 yrs, which the US government is now getting involved, saying that they support free speech especially when it concerns it's own US citizens.

To relate this to class, we have talked about our first amendment right to free speech in class. This is a prime example of how not many countries have that, and just because you are American doesn't mean you get the rights of America in other countries.

Also, things like this have happened in the past in other countries, and a lot of times within one year the US government works a little diplomatic magic to get the US citizens pardoned by the country. However there are some extreme instances where the US can't get the person freed and those would be what you see on the History channel show 'Jailed Abroad'.

Romney's "Holey" Fiscal Plan

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/opinion/missing-details-of-mr-romneys-fiscal-plan.html?_r=1&ref=healthinsuranceandmanagedcare

Mitt Romney's financial plan has received much criticism about its vagueness. Many see potential flaws in his plan, and find it difficult to understand what programs and funding he's looking to cut, should he be elected into office. Romney promised "We will level with the American people about what it will take to truly cut spending and balance our budget." This is a very murky, unclear message, and though it may pass the primary vote, he will have to elaborate on his financial plans if he seeks the presidential office. I believe his plans lack any meaning at this point. He makes the process sound very painless and simple, as if America's financial situation is a few simple tax cuts before we're out of the weeds. The problem is that Romney cannot tell people how difficult it is really going to be to get out of this mess, and still expect to be elected. People want to hear good things, and thus, politicians usually tell the people the "simple details", which usually isn't much. The next president could face a similar plight to that of president Hoover, who also had some tough decisions to make, and although he was disliked by a majority of the American people, he did benefit the country years later. To get our country out of the financial swamp that its in, the hard decisions have to be made, and while it may hurt some people in the process, in the end, it can benefit the country. It really comes down to Machiavelli's question, "Do the ends justify the means?"

Possible Spending Solution?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/12/06/common-sense-solution-to-budget-madness-government-shutdown-prevention-act/

This article is written by James Lankford, who is a Republican from the House of Representatives who serves on the Budget Committee. He discusses the current problems within the government that have added up to our increased debt. He also talks about a new reform proposal that he was going to introduce to several other congressmen and the chairman of the committee. This reform plan is titled the Government Shutdown Prevention Act and would take a few steps to turn around our current way of handling things. It says that "if a budget does not pass the House and Senate before the end of the fiscal year, an automatic continuing resolution kicks in with an across-the-board 1 percent spending reduction on discretionary spending." It goes on to say that spending is then cut by another 1 percent every 3 months until a long-term budget is signed.

The first thing that surprised me about this article wasn't actually the proposed plan itself, but the state of the budget that was explained by the author. I didn't know that the past 3 years' budgets were actually continuing resolutions, which, as we read in chapter 14, means that the government just spends as much as they did the year before because they couldn't come to a decision. What this, and the results of the super-committee show us, is that our main problem with our budget seems to be indecisiveness. The proposed plan would definitely kick the government into action and force them to be decisive, but I'm not sure if this would really work correctly. Even if a budget is made, that doesn't necessarily mean that spending is going to be reduced. Based off of the idea of incrementalism, it would actually be more likely for the budget to increase from one year to the next. Furthermore, even if the cuts do go into action, is it really going to make that much of a difference? As we discussed in class, most of our budget actually goes to entitlements like Medicare, so cutting spending on the smaller, non-expenditures (discretionary spending) doesn't seem like it would actually have a large effect on the budget as a whole. So, while I think that it's a good idea to try to get the government to be decisive, I'm not quite sure if this plan would work correctly or actually make much of a difference.

Plan to Widen Availability of Morning-After Pill Is Rejected

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/08/health/policy/sebelius-overrules-fda-on-freer-sale-of-emergency-contraceptives.html?_r=1&ref=policy

On Wednesday, Kathleen Sebelius, our Health and Human services secretary, overruled the F.D.A. by rejecting a plan to make emergency contraceptives available over the counter to women of all ages. The contraceptive pill, Plan B One-Step has been available to women 17 years and older over the counter. This will continue to be the law after Wednesday's decision. Ms. Sebelius had strong opinions on parental involvement in birth control for teenagers. She felt that although the risks of this pill are minimal, they were not thoroughly researched in some of the younger ages of possible applicants. Due to her decision, he Obama administration is taking a more conservative stance on Plan B. Another implication of the decision is that Plan B will be taking more of a place on the policy agenda, and will most likely pop up in the elections. Many top officials admitted that they agreed with scientists and the F.D.A., but they feared if they had voted in favor of approving it, that they would be fired. The law remains the same, but it has raised many questions and concerns.

History is made every day! This was not only Ms. Sebilius' first disagreement, but it is also the first time that our health secretary as ever publicly overruled the F.D.A. I think that the F.D.A. had logic in their plan to make it available to everyone. It is a woman's choice to do what she wants with her body. But might this raise teenagers' impression that sex is okay? I mean they would be making it so simple for teenagers to have unprotected sex, pick up a pill the next morning and most likely be okay. That is NOT the impression we want teenagers to have about unprotected sex. Also, it has been shown that even those eligible to get the Plan B pill over the counter do not because of the side affects. Yes, it might decrease pregnancy rates in our country which are extremely high right now, but it would almost be making it too easy. To relate this to class, when I was reading Chapter 16 it talked about president's regretting decisions in hiring officials once they had gone against their views. Obama had no problem lowering the age and making Plan B available to more women. However, his health secretary did not see it his way. Obama immediately constricted his views, but I think he is probably a bit frustrated. I predict some questioning for Obama on this subject.

Here are some statistics in the article you might find shocking:
As of now, half of all pregnancies are unplanned, more than 40 percent of children are born to unwed mothers, and 1.2 million abortions are performed every year involving one in every 50 women of reproductive age.

Environmental Post- New Pollution Rules for Boilers and Incinerators

The EPA on Friday proposed a new set of rules for boilers and incinerators, revising the Clean Air Act. The EPA is weary of their proposal this time because the last time they tried to propose new emission standards, it was was rejected by Obama for being too costly during this poor economy. Only 1% of all boilers in the United States will be required to install new equipment because the other 99% would be either exempt from the new rules or they can just simply increase their maintenance schedule to comply with the new rules. Gina McCarthy, the head of the EPA's office of air and radiation, said that these new rules could also prevent a significant number of deaths in the long run.
I think these new set of rules will be good for the environment but I think that they could have done better. These new rules will only force 1% of the 1.5 million boilers in the United States to actually change their equipment to meet the new standards which I think aren't that many. The EPA should propose a new set of rules that will have a more significant impact in helping the environment while at the same time, keeping costs low due to the economy. The class connection is that the EPA is part of the bureaucracy and that it is an independent regulatory agency which has some shared power with each branch in order to regulate the environment.

Economics: Concerns Over Merger in Pharmacy

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/business/tough-questions-for-express-scripts-medco-merger.html?pagewanted=1&ref=business&src=me

This article was about the proposed merger of Express Scripts and Medco Health Solutions, who, when together, would manage prescription drug benefits for more than 115 million people and handle one in every three prescriptions filled in the United States. Senior executives of both companies say that the merger would reduce the nation's health care costs and deliver drugs in a more efficient fashion. Lawmakers, however, are concerned that it would hurt competition, restricting patient's and doctor's options and giving the combined companies too much power over the industry.

There are several class connections relevant to this article. For one, the FTC, or the Federal Trade Commission, is the agency who will ultimately decide whether or not to approve the merger. The FTC is a good example of an independent regulatory agency. Also, the Senate Judiciary Committee, an antitrust subcommittee in the Senate, is holding the hearing for the merger, as it did for the proposed merger for AT&T and TMobile. As we learned in class, committees often hold hearings and "investigate problems and possible wrong-doing", much like the Senate Judiciary Committee is doing.

It sounds to me like the merger would be putting too many of our meds in one basket, so to speak. Holding 1/3 of the pharmaceutical industry is too much power for one company, which is what would happen if Express Scripts and Medco merged. It is a lot of the same issues we talked about in class about the attempted AT&T and TMobile merger. It would bring the combined companies to something close to a monopoly status, and I don't think we need to add this issue on top of all the others currently going on with health care.

Health Care Reform Law Saves Nebraska Seniors Millions

On December 6, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported that 2.65 million people saved 1.5 billion dollars on their prescriptions this year. With the new reform came the "Medicare Part D Coverage Gap" which is financially responsible for the entire cost of a prescription drug until the expense reaches the catastrophic threshold. The coverage is put into affect after a medicare beneficiary surpasses the coverage limit on prescription drugs. A specific statistic shows that 17,921 people saved over 10 million dollars in filing 118,539 prescriptions.

While I do not understand all of the logistics of the health care reform bill, I do obviously understand why it is significant that people save on their prescriptions. I know that prescriptions are expensive, especially the one's that need to be used frequently. I guess one thing I am confused about is if there is a price for having this special coverage on medicare or if it is just included. Like I said, I am not too knowledgeable in this area. I learned in class today that there is special money set aside for medicare. This seems to be a good thing and I like hearing that people are saving money money. 1.5 billion dollars is a lot of money that has been saved.

Unemployment rate down to 8.6%... I think so

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57335430/jobless-rate-down-to-8.6-lowest-in-2.5-years/

According to CBS news the unemployment rate is down to 8.6%. This is the lowest the rate has been in 2.5 years. 120,000 jobs were added last month in addition to the 72,000 that were created in the two previous months. Out of these jobs that have been created 140,000 were created in the private sector and 20,000 were government jobs. A lot of these jobs were added in to retail and the restaurant business but 17,000 health care jobs were created. It is predicted that the economy will grow another 2.5% by the end of this year. This is also being boosted by a booming auto-industry.

Like anybody, I'm glad to see that our economy is improving. A concern I have though is that so many of these jobs that were created were in retail and restaurants. These will most likely be temporary jobs that are only around for the holidays. A positive sign though is that there were so many jobs added that a lot of those jobs will be long term, including those in government and health care. I think that this is a step in the right direction for our economy and that we have even better things to come.

CA health care systems pay $2M in federal claims Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/12/07/state/n170920S10.DTL#ixzz1fuJ

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/12/07/state/n170920S10.DTL

This article was about two health care operators in California that had over billed the federal government for medical services. One of the groups, Catholic Healthcare West, is the fifth largest hospital provider in the nation and was charged $875,000. Sutter Health Association was charged $1.4 million in damages. The Department of Health and Human services was on the scene immediately and made sure all funds were repaid and that the process went smoothly.

I thought it was pretty interesting how quickly the HHS was on this case. I knew from in class that as an independent regulatory agency they had the power to regulate their "sector" you could say, but I didn't think they would work this quickly over a seemingly small incident like this. It kind of makes me hopeful for other aspects of our government, but at the same time reminds me how slowly the legislation moves and I how I wish things would get done this quickly in that department.

Concealed weapons against the Environment

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/opinion/sunday/concealed-weapons-against-the-environment.html?scp=4&sq=environment&st=cse

This article is about non-germane riders that were attached to the 2012 spending bill for the Department of Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Republicans of the House attached 39 anti-environmental riders to the bill. As we talked about in class, non-germane riders are slipped into the bill often secretly, and have absolutely nothing to do with the bill. According to the article one rider, which would block the EPA from adding any new species to endangered or threatened lists, was removed by a vote of 224-202. Most of the riders would prevent the EPA and the Department of Interior from creating almost any policies or enforcing any current policies.

I guess I don't really understand why Republicans, or anyone for that matter, would try to stop people from protecting the environment. I can't understand why you would try to pass legislation to stop the EPA and Department of Interior from doing their jobs. I can understand the different sides of welfare, taxes, spending, etc. that Republicans and Democrats push for, but why would anybody not want a clean environment? Are endangered animals and protected lands a bad thing to Republicans? I really just don't understand. However, I am glad that the one rider was struck down and I hope that more of them will also be struck down.

Bikere Ikoba's FINAL National Security Blog Post

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/opinion/national-security-and-americas-unnecessary-secrets.html?scp=5&sq=national%20security&st=cse

This article is about how over-classification of today's information concerning threats to our nation's security are actually possibly only further hindering the allowing of information to be effectively, efficiently, and correctly flowing through the government. As a result, information that doesn't need to be protected is, resulting in the wasting of government money. The reason this over-classification occurs so often is due to the fact that officials fear being punished for accidentally allowing important or "sensitive" information to be made public, in addition to the fact that going through so many files takes work-and marking a file as classified simply makes the job easier. Since no one is responsible for reviewing their work, the officials get away with it. President Obama is taking precautions to avoid this, however. In December of 2009, he issued an executive order to officials to not classify information if they seriously doubted it needed such protection, in addition to raising the training requirements of officials who would be classifying such documents, also reformatting the entire classifying system.

I found this article interesting. I like that President Obama has recognized the issue as a problem, and has so clearly gone through the efforts of doing something about it. I hadn't previously known that the over-classifying of government documents were even an issue to begin with; this finding surprises me. I would think that especially with all the changes post-9/11, making sure the correct files are properly grouped into categories, especially if they hold private information, would become a higher priority. This article relates back to class in that one of our recent discussions in the bureaucracy unit has actually been over the exact same topic: how, due to the complexity of our bureaucratic system, , one of the problems with the Hurricane Karina incident and its slow response to getting help to the hurricane victims was the continual blockage of information being effectively communicated. One may even argue the same in the case of 9/11, in the case of Department of Defense and its communication.

The Banking Security Revolution: Eliminate Social Security Numbers

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-banking-security-revolution-eliminate-social-security-numbers-ssn-2011-12-07

This article is about the decrease in security measures given by financial institutions (FI's) in the past two years. In 2009, 79% of FI's met Javelin Strategy & Research's criteria for fraud prevention. That percentage dropped to 54% in 2011. Javelin creates an annual banking identity safety scorecard, and this year's reported that financial institutions are not keeping up with the security demands required of a growing economy. Javelin suggests that banks stop using social security numbers as whole or partial identification. According to the article, social security numbers are becoming more of a popular security question, and are often a phished item for fraudsters. Javelin predicts that as the economy worsens, fraud will increase. Therefore, FI's need to protect their customers or their clientele will stop investing in the system.

I am very glad that I came across this article, because I know that I used my social security number for job applications online. I know of two relatives who have gotten their identity stolen, and the process to get things straightened out is an unbelievable hassle. You would think, however, that the banks are financial institutions that one could trust with their life savings; I guess not. The drop in the percentage of banks that actually follow security criteria was very shocking to me. I am not quite sure how else one could quickly be identified without a social security number, but I do agree that fraud will continue to increase if nothing is done to make them more private. This connects to class because social security numbers are administered by the Social Security Administration, an independent agency of the federal government. I found it interesting that the prime purpose of the Social Security Number is to track individuals for taxation purposes, and they have created over 450 million different numbers.

Military A Growing Terrorist Target - Lawmakers Warn

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/06/military-growing-terrorist-target-lawmakers-warn/

This article discusses the growing concern that terrorist groups may be targeting the United States Military. The government has reason to believe that terrorism extremists are not only plotting ways to embarrass the U.S. military, but also embedding themselves with the American armed forces. The article sites the Fort Hood Massacre as an example of such trends. The number of alleged plots targeting the military has grown significantly since then. Lawmakers said there have been 33 plots against the U.S. military since Sept. 11, 2001, and 70 percent of those threats have been since mid-2009. Major Nidal Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist, who is being held for the Fort Hood attacks, allegedly was inspired by radical U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Rep. Peter King of New York, the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said military service members are "symbols of America's power, symbols of America's might." He and many others claim that is the U.S. military is threatened, our country can appear weak and incapable. Despite the evidence, socially speaking, racial profiling in the military is not permitted, however, the speculations are causing some government official to think differently.King was also quoted saying "There's a definite threat from Islamic radicalization in various parts of our society, including within the military, and we can't allow political correctness to keep us from exposing this threat for what it is."

In regards to a class connection, I can relate this topic to the 14th Amendment discussing civil rights. According to the amendment, no one can be discriminated against due to race or religion; other extensions are present in the amendment, but the two aforementioned are pertinent to this scenario. The possibility of not allowing Islamic individuals to join the military is in direct violation of this amendment, however it is plausible that the Supreme Court interpret the amendment in favor of necessary exceptions in this situation. I am interested in hearing opinions from the class because I am finding myself in the middle of a personal moral dilemma on this issue. I do not believe racial profiling is fair or just, however, I am also concerned about the safety of not only the military, but also the citizens of the U.S. I am welcoming persuasion from anyone with a viewpoint.

Taliban+German Tanks+Russian Missiles=Poland

http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2011/11/polands-appeal-germany

Poland's prime minister Rodak Sikorski credits 'enlargement' to be the one of the main causes of the EU's problems. Poland operates in a free market economy and is the fastest growing economy in Europe, in the last four years. Sikorski points out that the Stability and Growth Act has been broken over 60 times by EU countries including the founders. However, Poland has infringed upon an aspect of the S&G Act since 2004 their overall debt is one of the lowest of the big European economies, still within the S&G's guidelines. Mr. Sikorski also, outlined a fiscal federation, with tough rules ("almost impossible" to block by political means) for backsliders, in return for the European Central Bank becoming a real central bank, and acting as a lender of last resort. Furthermore, Sikorski pointed out severe changes in how the EU is governed including pan-European members elected to European Parliament, fewer commissioners, and possibly directly-elected EU President. However, the EU would stay out of: "everything to do with national identity, culture, religion, lifestyle, public morals, and rates of income, corporate and VAT." Sikoski would go on to point out that Germany is an indispensable nation for keeping peace and democracy on the European continent and it needs to lead in the reform of EU. In one of his main points, Sikorski admits a surprising fear " I fear German power less than I am beginning to fear German inactivity."

I find Sikorski's areas of concern to be valid. I am in agreement that if the EU does not want to crash and burn they need reform as 27 nations rely upon the euro. Germany needs to step up if they want to keep Europe afloat, but not so in tyrannical way but with the input of other nations. Also, his idea that if the European Central Bank were to become real that it would become extremely difficult to borrow and have the EU stay out of individual nations internal affairs. However I see possible flaws with the Euro in place, concerning America. If the Euro still exists that means we still have to bail out the suffering, overly welfare, European economies and the dollar would increase in value. If it were to collapse nations would return to their own national currencies and debts being paid to creditors would cease. But this might hurt the American income from European nations paying back our money. I see two options to this concerning America: Option A) we keep the euro afloat so we can sustain European economies buying our products but they still borrow going along the same path of deeper debt. Option B) We let the Euro fail and not have to bail out European welfare states any longer and that would increase the value of the dollar. In the short term the dollar would slightly decrease as those nations can't buy our products. But in the long term we are the only provider of goods because no one else can produce them on the continent, boosting our economy. (And if you think European countries would seek the Chinese currency as a crutch, that is crazy, as it is a communistic currency that is already inflated and the government can control the value of it's worth. *it would be a repeat of the 'enlargement' of the EU all over again.)
Class connection: The fiscal policy of lending and borrowing is evident with the EU borrowing from the United States, as they go deeper into debt to support their welfare states.

Molly Moon's Economic Blog Post #1....FINAL POST!! :)

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/employed-women-dropping-out-of-the-labor-force/?ref=economy

So my last post is about economy. The particular article that I found was about how in the last few months or so, the number of women in the labor force (those working or actively looking for a job) has dropped quite a bit. Leaving the work force means that one either quits his/her job and doesn't look for a new one or is looking for a job but stops. The article said that the number of men in the work force rose by about 23,000, whereas the number of women in the labor force dropped by about 339,000. The article said that, surprisingly, most of the women who left the labor force recently were actually employed the month before they left. (About 58%) The article also said that it is not really known why the number of women in the labor force has plumeted so much.

Okayy, so I think this article is very interesting. I think that I kind of contradict myself when I talk about women because I feel like women have the right to do whatever they want. If a woman wants to be a doctor or a lawyer, by all means, go ahead. But if she wants to be a housewife and spend her life cooking, cleaning, and taking care of the kids, then go ahead! Now, where I contradict myself to an extent is that I think it is more of the woman's job to take care of the kids and the house. Just because of mother's intuition and I don't know I guess it's because of the stereotype we all grow up with, but I guess it just seems like a woman needs to take care of the family and the man needs to take care of providing for the wife and family. I mean I definitely want to go to college and have a job and all, but I also want to raise my kids and take care of my husband. So I feel like I'm contradicting myself when I talk about it, but yeahh. Umm....I definitely think that it's interesting that the number of women in the labor force has dropped so much. Since the article said it is unknown why so many women have dropped out, I am very curious. There hasn't really been an especially big baby boom for maternity leave and the EEOC would obviously not allow only women to be fired based on their gender. So I'm curious to find out why it is that so many women recently dropped out of the labor force. Anyway, to connect this to class: when we talked about suffrage during Chapter 10: Elections and Voting Behavior, we talked about how women basically gained the rights that men have, meaning they have the right to work or not work, whichever each individual chooses. This whole quarter we have also talked about how women are still not as powerful as men in the aspect of the government. There has never been a woman president or a woman vice president. There are nowhere near as many women in the Supreme Court, Congress, or even as Presidents and CEOs of companies. This week we also talked about how the EEOC is an Independent Executive Agency.

Poor Economy Leaves More Children at Risk

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/poor-economy-leaves-more-children-at-risk.html?scp=5&sq=economy&st=cse

This article is about how the economy is effecting families and children. Children are being split from their parents, because the economy effected their parents and the parents can't raise them. The children are being put in foster homes because of it, even teenagers. Courts in Texas are trying their hardest to reunite the children and parents, but sometimes, its just not possible. Because of the raise in children in foster care, they foster programs have to pay more, but the government isn't helping them, so they are going off 30% money from state and donation to pay what needs to be payed.

I think its sad that kids are being split from their parents because of the economy. It's even more sad that the government can't or won't help the foster programs. Its good that Texas courts are trying to reunite the families, because the kids need it. But, as it states in the article, love isn't enough to raise a child, and they sometimes can't be reunited. Its scary that even teenagers are being put at risk, because that can risk how good they do at school and how they act. I just think the whole situation is overall sad.

Kepler 22-b: Earth-like planet confirmed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16040655

Scientists at NASA's Ames research center have discovered an "Earth 2.0". About 600 light years away lies a planet, now named Kepler 22-b, that lies within a habitable zone of its sun (which is only sightly less powerful than ours), has a 290 day year, and a surface temperature of about 22 degrees C (room temp). The only down side to this cool twin planet is that it has about twice the amount of mass as earth and therefore has a much stronger gravitational force that would be very uncomfortable (it's liveable though). NASA has classified K 22-b as a planet and currently has 48 other earth sized/like candidates in the process of confirmation. Scientists are also excited about this new finding because they believe it's a huge step to discovering and researching extraterrestrials.

This is SUPER exciting to hear we (the US) is making this kind of head way scientifically. It seems lately that generally most people have been against NASA (and Independent Executive Agency), believing a bunch of money is put into NASA and they're doing nothing in return but bringing back a couple of space rocks. This is just proof that there's more going on behind the scenes than what we know, and since these people work for the president, leads me to believe there's more going on in the executive branch than what we (maybe should or need to) know right now. On another note, this is also very exciting, the thought of one day civilians being able to visit and vacation on another planet possibly. Or maybe discovering beings very similar to us. It's fantasy-like, I know, but possibly more real and in the nearer future than we think.

Unemployment drops

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/03/business/economy/us-adds-120000-jobs-unemployment-drops-to-8-6.html?ref=unitedstateseconomy

My article is about how the unemployment rate has dropped. For most of 2011 the percentage has been at 9%, just recently it has dropped under 9%. The article says how more jobs are being created. President Obama stated how his goal is to improve the economy and create more jobs. The relates to class concerning Obama's jobs bill. Last section we got to see how bills were passed and how hard they are with both the house and senate having to approve and read over the bills. Having the jobs bill is very important to our nation, it is a big step to fixing our economy.

I think it is a wonderful thing that our unemployment rate has dropped. Hopefully our economy turns around in the near future. Congress has been approving bills to create more jobs which is a good thing. For example the veterans bill we talked about during class. Hopefully similar bills are to come.

31 Are Arrested at Occupy D.C. Building Site

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/us/occupy-dc-stopped-from-putting-up-a-building.html?scp=2&sq=Occupy&st=cse

this article talks about how the affects of the occupy walstreet movment are still well underway. the occupy D.C. movement eventhough they are mostly in harmony with the police, or as well as you can be while protesting, have recently had 31 arrested. the members of the movement errected a building built out of plywood to have meetings in and to shield them from some of the winds. but the building was deemed unsafe as was to be removed. the protesters got onto the roof and would not leave. the police told them that if they didnt get down that they would be arrested, but still most stayed on top. the police had to get a cherry picker and a big inflatable pad to catch them as they jumped off the two story building, or go up and get them if they refused. i find it interesting at how the resoningis of the people taking place in this protest. they would rather be arrested to draw attention to the area and cause rather than jus goin on with their protest without a building.

Obama Offers ‘Condolences’ in Deaths of Pakistanis

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/world/asia/obama-offers-condolences-in-deaths-of-pakistani-troops.html?ref=politics

in this articled it talks about how Obama has apologized to the pakistani president about the NATO bombings that killed pakistani citizens. NATO claims that the pakistani millitary told them it was ok to bomb the area, while the pakistani military said that they were given the wrong coordinates of the area. im not sure which one is true, but both the U.S. and pakistan agree to keep to the treaty that is in effect for both of us. i think if we end up going to official war with iran which i believe we will, i think it will be a good thing to be allys with pakistan so that we have back up and a possible operating base close to iran.

Explosion Seen as Big Setback to Iran’s Missile Program

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/world/middleeast/blast-leveling-base-seen-as-big-setback-to-iran-missiles.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=drone%20shot%20down%20over%20iran&st=cse

this article is about how An iran missle base that was developing a solid fuel rocket was bombed and destroyed along with killing one of irans generals. also weeks later they claim to have shot down a U.S. drone. While the U.S. says that the only possibility that they shot down a drone of ours is that we lost control of a drone we had on the western border of Afganistan. I think this is building a lot of tension between us and the iranians. a lot of evidence supports that we blew up their base with the same drone that we used to spy on them. and i think we did, but it is ok because we are just enforcing sanctions that we have in place to prevent iran from aquiring nuclear or intercontinental missiles. there is also talk that the cause for the base exploding was not the U.S. fault but it was a sabatours work. which leads me to believe that it was the isreali commandos. either way it isw a good thing that the sight was blown up because we do not need iranians with big bombs.

Communists make comeback

http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/05/9217381-voters-punish-putin-as-russias-communists-make-comeback

This article basically talks about Russia. They have a parliamentary system like Britain, and in their recent election the communists gained seats while Putins people lost seats.

In relation to class, we talked about how are parliamentary system is more efficient and allows more access to government. Well, now the commies have more access to Russia's government.

This is bad because if the communists keep gaining seats or maybe even attempt a physical overthrow it could recreate a communist Russia. This would be very bad because communism does not like capitalism, and vice versa. If Russia were to turn communist again, it might lead to them trying to reestablish the USSR by taking back those countries that broke off, maybe cause another cold war, or even a WW3 which could turn into a nuclear war.

Basically a powerful nation turning communist is a bad thing, especially someone as big as Russia.

National Security: U.S. Settles Suit Over Anthrax Attacks

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/us/anthrax-victims-family-to-receive-2-5-million-in-settlement.html?_r=2&ref=us

In 2001, letters containing anthrax were sent to media organizations and two senators, killing five people and sickening at least seventeen others. At first, because of the nearness of 9/11, (the anthrax attacks occurred in late September/early October), officials thought it may have been Al Qaeda following up with a germ assault, but the F.B.I. didn't take long to start focusing on the possibility that an American insider working with bio-defense had been the sender. Finally, in 2008, the F.B.I. concluded that Bruce E. Ivans, a microbiologist who worked on anthrax vaccines at an Army lab in Maryland, was the culprit, though some of his colleagues still think he's innocent. The article was mostly about the government agreeing to a settlement of $2.5 million to Maureen Stevens, the widow of Robert Stevens, a tabloid photo editor who was the first casualty of the attacks, and how this case and other cases on the issue have raised concerns on the security of government laboratories. Problems found with security were wide-ranging, from a lack of overall security, lax standards for assessing employees who have access to germ stocks, and some deadly pathogens in storage that were not even listed on the database.

"What we found was a horror show, basically. There was a serious potential danger to society from a biological attack as a result of either an insider or outsider getting access to these lethal organisms."

This article is very worrying, obviously. We're so worried about terrorists attacking us with a bomb, or with a plane, when materials that have the potential to kill many more people than a bomb ever could are sitting right under our noses. To be told that the security of deadly pathogens were ever not as much as a priority as it should be is, quite frankly, appalling. However, at least we can say that these lapses in protection are being worked on. Since this case, and others dealing with the anthrax letter attacks, have brought to light these security issues, many strides have been taken to remedy the problems.

Health Care Jobs Grow...In Administration

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/story/2011-11-30/health-care-creates-jobs/51506244/1

This article is interesting in that it talks about the effects of the new health care legislation on the workforce. One hospital, Exeter Health Resources, had to let go nearly 5% of its workforce, mostly consisting of nurses. Exeter, however, is still hiring, but only in the administrative department. Even though there are consistent cuts in Medicaid, the health care sector is the nation's top job generator. Of the 80,000 new jobs created in October, 12,000 were related to administrative health care. The reason for this is the government's new regulations that require an increased use of electronic information technology. Also, the hospitals are preparing to care for the millions of people who will be have health care insurance in 2014. Federal funds are being distributed to hospitals throughout America to create electronic medical record systems. With the growing amount of technology, hospitals are hiring a greater amount of clerical and administrative positions.

Although I may not entirely agree with the new health care plan, I am pleased that it is creating a greater amount of jobs. I am confused, however, that they are laying off nurses if one of the reasons they are hiring administrative positions is because of the millions of people who will soon get health coverage. Those patients are still going to need caregivers. This connects to class because of the money distributed from the federal government. The read for tonight discussed congresses budget and I found the U.S federal law that was passed during the 79th congress in 1946 that allocates money to hospitals. It was originally called the Hill-Burton Law, but was amended in 1975 to become Title XVI of the Public Health Service Act.

As Public Sector Sheds Jobs, Blacks are Hit Hardest

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/us/as-public-sector-sheds-jobs-black-americans-are-hit-hard.html?scp=2&sq=employment&st=cse

This article starts with an example of a man named Mr. Buckley who is 34 has 2 daughters and is engaged, but is now living in the basement of his mother's home. Why is this? Because he was laid off from his well paying government job as a Chicago Transit bus driver and has not been able to find a new job for the past two years. He is one of tens of thousands of once solidly middle class African-American government workers. These people started being laid off at the end of the recession in June 2009. Although the economy is continuing to downfall, the unemployment rates have affected African-Americans the most according to recent employment rate studies. Last summer the unemployment rate for African-Americans hit 16.7% which was its highest level since 1984. The reasons believed for the unemployment rates are that African-Americans are statistically less educated, faced with continued discrimination, and living in areas that have been slower to recover from the recession. On the bright side of things, many African-Americans are getting jobs out of the public-sector and making progress. African-Americans are 1/3 more likely to receive these jobs than whites. However, recently there have been more employment positions cut in the public-sector than in the private, which is putting more people in this situation. Sadly, these cuts aren't expected to end anytime soon.

I think this article is really sad. Imagine having your life together and living the American dream and having it taken right out from underneath your feet in the blink of an eye. I don't really think it is a racial discrimination issue, because statistically, African-Americans just happen to fall in the unemployed population in our country. I feel that if all of these people are losing jobs and becoming unemployed, they will be living off of the government and receiving unemployment checks. What I believe needs to happen is some sort of reform that can change the unemployment in this country. One way I can relate this to class is in our learning of the legislation process. How might our country go about this? Will they sneak it onto some other bill? Or sit down and take the time to go through the real process step by step, since it is such a big issue in this country.

Loophole=easy way out and faster.
Legislative full on process= Long, frustrating, but hey, you just might change the country!

Rape In Iowa Nursing Homes

Governor Terry Branstad pledged to review a law which states that it is illegal for registered sex offenders and convicts to work in nursing homes but makes it legal for them to live in a nursing home if court ordered. Under the law, the home's current residents and families do not have to be notified if a convict is living in the nursing home. Many offenders are now facing charges for sexual assault on elderly members and mentally disabled residents. A new law would require nursing homes to have an annual inspection and employees would be required to be trained in these types of situations so they know what they're up against. Last February, the Des Moines Register released a statistic stating that 27 violent sex offenders were living in 15 different care facilities across Iowa.

This may be one of the most disturbing articles I have ever read. I don't know whose idea it was to put violent sex offenders and criminals in nursing homes but that was an awful idea. I feel that it is especially disturbing that residents and family members do not know of these people living with their loved ones. I learned at the beginning of this class that state laws and federal laws are two different things. This is a law that is specific to the state of Iowa. I don't know what would motivate a person to sexual assault people who are completely defenseless but it's really messed up. Hopefully a new law gets passed very soon.

http://qctimes.com/news/opinion/editorial/keep-felons-away-from-iowa-s-most-vulnerable/article_63fff3dc-1a24-11e1-a9b4-001cc4c002e0.html

Social Security in the U.S.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/social_security_us/index.html?scp=1&sq=social%20security%20failing&st=cse

In 2011, about 55 million Americans received about $727 billion in Social Security benefits. What is the road ahead for Social Security? Some believe its at the end of the rope, others believe it just needs reform. When the Republicans took control of the House, they avoided making changes with Social Security, but rather set out to change Medicare and Medicaid. I believe that there is much domestic (and defense) spending that needs to be checked, and Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are just a few. Our Social Security system is in dire need of reform, or else I fear it may either fall apart, thus causing millions of retired/elderly/disabled people to live without these monthly checks from the government, or the system will bog down our government in even more national debt. A major problem for the system is the large number of retirees currently receiving Social Security compared to the number of people working, thus giving money to Social Security. The numbers don't add up, and because of this, our government has been putting more federal money into this system recently (within the past 10 years or so). Whatever is done (if anything), I'm curious how this is going to affect many people in our generation when we reach the age of retirement.

Safety From Iran vs. A Relationship with Russia

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/23/as-russia-balks-at-us-missile-defense-plan-in-europe-us-says-nothing-to-fear/

This article discusses the current problems that the United States is having in reference to the position of it's missile defense system in Europe. While the U.S. says that they plan to put up missile "shields" in some European countries including Poland and Romania in order to address the increasing threat of missiles from Iran, Russia isn't crazy about this plan. Russian president Mendvedev met with Obama on November 12th and Obama claimed that it was a "reset of U.S.- Russia relationships" and also reenacted the START (Strategic Arms Recuction) Treaty. Now, Russia says that if the U.S. does put up the missile shield, they will set up missiles in the very western area of Russia. NATO and Obama have been trying to get Russia involved in missile defense cooperation, but so far it hasn't really worked out.

The first thing that we have to realize is that Russia's logic is actually quite justified. We told them that we'd reduce our arms, but then we turned around and said we'd still set up some new missiles right next to them. They really do have a right to feel threatened, even though we've told them that we're not trying to harm them. The main question here is "what do we value more?". Would we rather have precautions set up to protect us from Iran, or would we rather have a working relationship with Russia? I'm somewhat tied on the issue. I feel that protection on the Iran front is a definite must based on recent events, but I don't think we should let it jeopardize our safety and security on another front, namely Russia. We've never really been on very good terms with Russia, so the relationship that we hold with them currently should be held up if at all possible. Since Obama is our chief diplomat, as we learned in chapter 13, and he seems to do an okay job of dealing with Mendvedev, I think that another meeting or discussion needs to be arranged. He and NATO, as they too are a key part of this issue, need to be more open to compromise, a characteristic that we said was important in a president in class, and should try to find a compromise in which neither nation feels that its security is put at high risk.

Bikere Ikoba's Health Care and Environmental Blog

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/18/opinion/presidential-politics-and-clean-air.html?_r=1&ref=airpollution

This article concerns an columnist's opinion about President Obama's recent decision to reject further smog restrictions. Calling Obama's decision "the worst environmental decision of his administration", the writer believes that the administration's resolution on the smog was an embarrassment, especially to Lisa Jackson, the Environmental Protection Agency's administrator who had initially proposed the restrictions. However, the White House argued that idustries and politics do not belong together, in addition to arguing that it would not be beneficial to impose more difficulty on our nation's industries, especially in today's unstable economic times, and that the topic could be revisited in the future, after newer sciences concerning the environment come out.

I persnally feel as if the White House administration's decision, while understandable, wasn't the best action to take. I feel as if this resolution is sending mixed signals to the general public; with the countless celebrities campaigns playing all over our television channels, a few of which the First Lady herself even appears in, and then big government's choice in environmental matters such as this only hurts the general public's actions when it comes to caring about the world around us. One of the arguements given (that the topic could be revisited later), seems to ring a bit to much to administration procrastination, to be honest. One way in which this article relates to our class is showing the interaction between an interst group, proposals, and government, all three of which are covered heavily in class.

Cha boy Max McDaniel with the help of beach shirt

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/outrage_as_flag_burning_mob_storms_uk_embassy_in_tehran_1_4015288

Ok so I really wanted to talk about this because it is a big even but Brian already did the CNN one so I'm just going to do a different newspapers article about it.#GeedangitBrian

A mob of angry protesters in the Iranian capital of Tehran stormed the British embassy. Protesters were burning the British flag and damning the country of England. The protesters entered the compound after business hours as police attempted to hold them back. Buildings in the compound were burned and the British flag was replaced with the flag of an Islamic saint. The British prime minister is blaming the Iranian government for not taking action and controlling its people. Also, this is putting pressure on Western nations to stop Iran's nuclear program even though they insist it is for fuel.

I am not a fan of Iran. I think that storming a embassy of a U.S. is an act of war. I think that it was a good call of Britain to get their people out of there to avoid any injuries. I think that Iran should be punished. I just don't know how you can do something more than sanctions without starting a war. We are walking a fine line with a radical Islamic country that may now have nuclear weapons. It's time to send in Seal team 6 and the Israeli commandos.

Study: Even with more kids in poverty, number of uninsured children fell 14% over 3 years

A study conducted by Georgetown University has found that the number of uninsured children in the U.S. has steadily decreased despite the increasing number of children in poverty. This is mainly due to how easy it is to access Medicaid for children. In contrast, the amount of uninsured adults has risen over the past few years. The most important programs offering insurance for children come from the Children's Health and Insurance Programs. Obama's 2009 stimulus provided a lot of funds for this program to help provide insurance.
I think it's good that more and more children are getting insurance even though the amount of children living in poverty is rising. This is all going to come full circle when next year when the Health Care bill comes before the Supreme Court, who are going to decide if it is unconstitutional or not. If they decide that it's constitutional, everyone will be required to have health insurance which I think is generally a good thing but it will also cause many problems for some. I do think however that it is very important for children to have health insurance which I think the Healthcare bill will mostly take care of.

Senate Approves Bill to make Military Custody on Terror Cases

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/us/politics/senate-approves-military-custody-for-terror-suspects.html?_r=1&scp=7&sq=National%20Security&st=cse

This article is about a bill now approved by Senate. The bill states that any known Al Qaeda member or possible Al Qaeda member or terrorist and their allies, including people arrested in the United States will be put under Military Custody. Though the Obama administration threatened to veto it, Senate defied them by approving it. The chairman of Senate Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin says “We are at war with Al Qaeda, and people who are determined to be part of Al Qaeda should be treated as people who are at war with us."

I think its good that we put these people under Military Custody. It stops any other possible terrorist attacks. Though, it may end up being like Arizona and the immigration. People will start taking offence to it, even though if you aren't a member or possible member, there should be no problem, because you won't have to be under military custody. I think people would feel safer in the United States with this. People would be able to get on airplanes and trains with the a lower possibility of a terrorist being on the plane or train.

Britain evacuates embassy

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/30/world/europe/uk-iran-demonstrations/index.html?hpt=wo_c2

This article is about Britain's response to the Iranian invasion of their embassy. Britain decided to remove their staff from Iran and required The Iranian embassy in England to return to Iran. The article also talked about how many other European countries are leaving their embassies in Iran. British Prime Minister David Cameron said how he was upset that Iranian soldiers were not protecting the embassy when it was attacked. Under international law, Iranian soldiers are required to protect embassies. Lastly, the Iranian government stated the attacks were from a protest that had gotten out of control. The protest was of students protesting against Britain cutting funds to Iran.

This article does not directly involve the United States. However I found it very important especially because we talked about it in class. I don't know if I should side with Britain or Iran on this. The Iranian leaders claimed that this was not a planned attack and that they regret that it had happened. I understand Britain wanting to bring home the people in Iran, but I think it is a bit harsh forcing the people at the Iranian embassy to leave the country. With the expansion of the Iranian nuclear program I do not blame Britain and the other European nations for leaving Iran. This connects with our class because I am sure it will be discussed in American politics, and will most likely become a topic discussed in the presidential race.

NYC Homeless Policy

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/nyregion/city-council-to-sue-over-stricter-homeless-policy.html?scp=8&sq=welfare&st=cse

This article talks about how the City Council of New York City is going to sue the administration of the mayor. They are suing over a new policy that imposed new requirements on homeless people. The new policy requires all single adults to prove that they have no alternative place to stay before they are allowed to stay at a shelter. The policy's implementation has been temporarily postponed due to a lawsuit brought against the city by the Legal Aid Society. The speaker of the City Council called the new policy "cruel and punitive" and said that the council would file a suit against the administration.

I think that this policy is ridiculous. Why should people have to prove that they are homeless before being allowed to stay at a shelter? Do they really think somebody who is not homeless is going to go stay at a homeless shelter? I can't think of anybody in their right mind who would stay there if they had another place to stay. On another point, how is one supposed to prove that they have no other place to stay? It's not like they have their own little name tag or something that says "Hi, I'm homeless." I don't see why this policy makes any sense to anyone. I feel like making them prove they have no home is like rubbing dirt in their wounds. Why can't you just accept that the people are homeless instead of constantly reminding them by making them prove it?

Nations Meet to Address Problems of Climate Change

http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/e/environment/index.html

On Monday of this week, 194 nations met in Durban, South Africa to try to advance the global response to dangerous climate change. The task at hand was to determine how to equitibly distribute the responsibilities of the world's nations regarding climate change. The primary issue concerns fiscal resources. Smaller, poorer countries argue that the large, capable countries should accept most of the financial burden. A controversial decision made by George W. Bush during his presidency was to reject participation in the Kyoto Protocal. The Kyoto Protocal was a global attempt to limit emission of greenhouse gases. Each country who chose to partake in the effort set a goal to decrease its annual carbon emission. At this conference in Ddurban, essentially, countries are meeting to determine a manner in which to improve participation in the Kyoto Protocal. President Obama has pledged to reduce American emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, but his preferred approach, a nationwide cap-and-trade system for carbon pollution, failed miserably in Congress in 2010. United States emissions are down about 6 percent over the past five years, largely because of the drop in industrial and electricity production caused by the recession. In addition to America, the industrialized nations of China and India are not currently participating in the Kyoto Protocal. Ironically, these nations contribute the most pollution. Intended actions resulting from the meeting have yet to be publicly disclosed.

It will be interesting to see what new initiatives to improve the environment emerge from this conference. A class connection relevant to this article is a topic we often discuss in class. The fact that the poorer countries are depending on the wealthier countries for their well-being is similar to the widely debated taxing template. Some argue that everyone should pay the same amount of money for taxes while others claim the wealthier should take on a responsibility to support the rest of the country. This debate is not only prevelent within the United States, but across the globe.

Fearing earmark creep, senators propose new ban

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/30/politics/senate-anti-pork-legislation/index.html?eref=rss_latest&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_latest+%28RSS%3A+Most+Recent

%29

Senator Claire McCaskill and Patrick Toomey have just introduced an anti-earmark legislation that would ban pork barrel spending permanently and prevent it from even reaching House and Senate floors. Congress had agreed to give up earmarks a year ago, but McCaskill and Toomey say pork has slowly sneaked back in. McCaskill is confident in her bill saying, "It would be politically "dangerous" to vote against it", however other senate members aren't so sure on how the voting will turn out. In addition, the bill also has a section that says lawmakers can challenge any piece of legislation that might meet the definition of an earmark, and they can only be denied the challenge by a 2/3 majority vote.

I'm so glad I stumbled on this article considering we just went over pork in class just recently. I, and I think I speak for almost everyone in class having listened to all the complaints during discussion, am very excited that someone in Congress is trying to put a stop to this nonsense spending. If you want a university to do research on surface winds or something, then that's what grants are for. In my opinion, those kinds of things only make it into pork to try to balance out the ridiculous stuff (like the sex life of a Japanese quail or something) so people can keep slipping in earmarks.

Food Stamp Fraud leads to huge losses

http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/dc/2011/11/maryland-virginia-top-nation-food-stamp-fraud/1962111

This article is about the billions of dollars that are being lost to food stamp fraud. An estimated $2.5 billion is being lost to stamp fraud this year. To con the government for the stamps, people are lying about what their yearly income is, or they "fail" to notify Social Security if their income or number of dependents has changed. Some are even going as far as making false documentation so they may receive the stamps. Connecticut, Maryland, and Vermont are the top three states in fraud, with each state losing $6.23, $6.11, and $5.60 per $100 dollars given, respectively. Many states, like Maryland, have less than 1 investigator per county, due to budget cuts, which leaves the door wide open for this fraud.

This article really disturbed me. I had no idea that so much money was being lost to food stamp fraud, of all things! To top it all off, most of those who get caught are getting off with almost no consequences! Only SEVEN of the many that committed this crime were prosecuted, with others being settled outside of court. This reminded me of how legislation takes so long to get through Congress, while things like this are happening constantly, resulting in huge losses. This just makes me frustrated because all these little things are adding up into this huge debt, and Congress just keeps pushing back dates to get things done. I'm not sure what should be done, other than hiring more investigators, because this is on such a large scale. I just really hope the wheels get moving soon.

Graduates living at home are hurting the enconomy?

This article was about young college graduates moving back home after college because they either, don't have enough money to buy their own home, or because they want to save up some more money before moving out in order to get on more solid footing. Since these people don't buy or rent homes or apartments they are depriving the economy of jobs and money. For example, if someone were to live at home for a while they wouldn't have to pay a morgage or rent. They wouldn't have to buy new furniture for their home. They wouldn't have to pay for cable or hire a handyman to fix something going wrong. All the things provide lots of jobs and lots money. In fact, according to the article, under normal circumstances every new household formed adds about $145,000 to the overall spending back to the economy that year. It's sends a ripple effect into the economy everytime someone buys a home because when you spend people associated with the home industry spend as well. The article also states that because more people are living at home more, the household demand is way down. Since that is down there is less and less new homes being built which in turn means less jobs. Some economists, however, believe that because so many young people are reluctnatly living at home there is a pent-up demand for new homes. Once they get enough money, they'll leave and the extreme demand will definatley help the economy.

I never thought that people living at home could hurt the economy but it makes sense. The best thing that could happen to the economy right now is an increase in jobs and for every home bought, jobs are created causing that ripple effect I was talking about before. Someone living at home to save up money and get better footing are helping themselves but hurting the economy in the long run. Hopefully what some economists believe about the pent up household demand is true because that will only do good things for the economy. In the last paragraph of this article a man living at home was quoted. He said, “You know, they really should have kept that tax incentive for first-time home buyers. I’m creating jobs after all. I thought that was a good thing.” I thought that this was interesting. Having that tax incentive for first time buyers could make those people living at home want to buy homes if they get a tax break for it.

To relate this back to class, right now democrats want the richest 1% to pay an extra tax but republicans don't like that idea. The republicans would probably be in favor of having the tax incentive as long as the rich aren't getting taxed to make up for it.

Molly Moon's National Security Blog #2

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/us/17nsa.html?pagewanted=1&ref=nationalsecurityagency

This article is about the government reading the e-mails of American citizens at random in order to look e-mails being sent to people in another county about terrorist actions and such. The article said that the program that the National Security Agency uses randomly selects e-mails to read and scans them. And that billions of e-mails are being scanned by the system at all times. For all we know, some of our e-mails have been "read". The article talks about how some think it is good to have the program because multiple threats have been detected through the program and "potentially avoided terrorist attacks". In contrast, some think it is a bad idea. The article also talks about how the government listens in on private telephone conversations at times for the same reason, to try to listen for terrorist plans. However, this is being done less and less because of e-mail surveillance.

Okayy, so after reading this article, I am actually kind of surprised. I knew that the government can read e-mails if they have a reason to, but I didn't know that they could randomly choose e-mails to read. After reading the article, I think this e-mail surveillance is extremely unfair. I think that there are a lot of flaws in it, which are explained in the article. First of all, by reading an e-mail, one cannot tell if the author of the article is an American or not, as pointed out in the article. It is slightly easier to tell by a phone call because of accents and pronunciation and such, but not an e-mail. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for trying to protect the country because the U.S. is truly an amazing country to live in and I pride myself on being an American, but I just feel like this is ineffective. Honestly, there are billions of e-mails, if not trillions, sent every day. And the computer program is supposed to randomly choose e-mails to scan? Honestly, what are the chances that these e-mails will be about terrorism attacks on the U.S.? Also, apparently one of Bill Clinton's e-mails was read and someone found out and the system workers got in trouble because it was suggested that the e-mail was read on purpose, since he used to be the President. Furthermore, I feel like the system doesn't seem very reliable. The article said that sometimes the system misses e-mails and accidentally picks up some, even though it shouldn't. From what the article said, it seems like the current system is very flawed and I just feel like it really isn't effective. To connect this to class, I want to connect it to what we have been talking about with the Ligigant Epitaphs. In multiple Epitaphs we have discussed the 9th Amendment and the right to privacy. I feel like this applies to the 9th Amendment because it seems like the citizens right to privacy is not being followed by the government "reading" the e-mails.

U.S.-Pakistani Relations

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/afghans-say-unit-was-attacked-before-airstrike/2011/11/28/gIQAX6ZY5N_story.html

This past Saturday, U.S. forces accidentally fired upon and killed 24 Pakistani military personnel. American forces were engaging Taliban insurgents until they ran across the Pakistani border. Pakistanis then began shooting flares and firing towards the direction of the skirmish. The Americans interpreted this as the Taliban and called in a an airstrike on the position, killing the Pakistanis. Angry pressure is rising among the Pakistani civilian population on the Pakistani government to end counter terrorism efforts with the U.S. Also, Pakistani forces have blocked two NATO supply routes into Afghanistan as a form of protest against the American efforts in Afghanistan. The Pakistani population finds common ground with Afghanis, concerning cultural and religious backgrounds, and may start to support the ousting of foreign countries in Afghanistan.

I find the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan starting to crumble. First the Bin Laden raid and now this are weakening our relations with a somewhat friendly Middle Eastern nation. Also, the Taliban seems to have found refuge along the Pakistani border as many insurgents seem to be fleeing there for safety out of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is Pakistan's, metaphorically speaking, "brother" due to cultural and religious affiliation, this might provide incentive to back Afghanistan, not the Taliban, against foreign invaders, America. If tensions continue to grow, Pakistan may start to resist Western influence and find America as a target, threatening our national security. Pakistan has nuclear capability and dislikes our presence with India and overall area in the Middle East. However, the U.S. is a major contributor to Pakistan's military and economic aid, and an aggressive Pakistani move would be unwise on their part. This situation is very delicate as Pakistan is a major influence in the Middle East and peaceful conclusion needs to be reached to keep Pakistan as an ally.

More Than 250 Children Among Dead, U.N. Says

In Syria, civilians are rising up against their president, Bashar al-Assad. There have been a few violent demonstrations, but the majority are peaceful, most likely marches. But even with civilians being so passive, the government won't have any of it. There determination to hold power has led them to open fire, deceive, torture, and kill there own people. There are some very disturbing encounters, such as a soldier killing a 2 year old because he "didn't want to see her grow up to be a demonstrator". Or even worse, Snipers were on hospital roofs, while security forces dressed as doctors and tortured and killed wounded protesters who came in for help. There are many other non-repeatable instances that are mentioned in the article as well. If there is a positive to a story like this, Russia, Syria's largest arms supplier, condemned the Syrian government for its violent acts, and France has made a promise to continue it's efforts to stop al-Assad's troops and has strongly encouraged other countries to take action as well.

Wow...this was a very tough article to read. I've never understood how neighbors, relatives, can turn on each other like this, not to mention treat children like this. It's absolutely sickening. I know we have our own problems here on our homeland, and because of this I normally would feel the opposite, but this seems to be a dire situation, and as far as I can tell, no one's doing anything about it! I don't want us to get wrapped up in a long term war, but maybe we can team up with other countries to try to stop this madness. Maybe this isn't possible at the moment and I'm just naive, but something needs to be done soon. Class connection: If I remember correctly, foreign affairs wasn't a very hot topic in candidate's campaigns like health care and economic points were. This article makes me wonder if that should be different or if I'm just over reacting on this one article.

Europe's economy on a downfall?

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/e/european_union/index.html?scp=8&sq=social%20welfare&st=cse

The E.E.C, or the European Economic Community, has come a long way from its humble beginning. Started after WWII, as to prevent such great international conflict, the European countries set out to start the largest joint economy ever made. This economy has worked well thus far, as the euro, the form of currency for most countries belonging to the E.E.C, has risen above the American dollar in the past several decades. However, recently the euro's value has fallen, and the future of the E.E.C looks uncertain. As Asia's economies are on the rise, Europe's economy is sinking. Greece, which came into the union after WWII with insurmountable debt, has certainly been a cause of this, requiring two very large bailout packages. Interest rates for European countries have risen recently, especially noticeable in Italy and Spain. I believe this could be a major problem for the world, especially if the whole thing goes kaput. If the E.E.C doesn't pick up soon, I believe European countries will become more hostile towards each other, and several countries may leave the union. This could be beneficial for the U.S. however, as European countries in need of money may come to us to borrow. However, with the U.S. economy in the tanker as well, these countries may look to Asia for assistance, therefore boosting Asia's market even further. I'm not sure what to think about this whole situation, but the E.E.C had better get its act together soon, or the whole world is in for a load of trouble.

Americans Support Climate and Energy Solutions

http://daily.sightline.org/2011/11/22/americans-support-climate-and-energy-solutions/

This article is about a recent set of polls released in November of 2011 that prove that "support for a variety of climate change & energy policies remain high across party lines." 70% percent of Americans say that global warming policy changes should be a medium to high priority for Congress and the President. Although only 50% said that their vote for President will be largely influenced by their stand on environmental issues, 88% feel as though party leaders and past presidents have not been doing enough for the environment. 63% of Americans are willing to pay an extra $100 per year for 20% of their energy to come from renewable resources.

I found the polls conducted in this article to be very interesting. Personally, I think that America does need to take more of a stand on environmental issues, like England is doing right now. It seems as though the American stand on the environment is pretty even across party lines. This connects to class by further emphasizing the effects of political ideologies on a voter. Most voters assume that Democrat and Republican Party stands are black and white on certain issues. However, many of the candidates have overlapping thoughts and may agree on certain ideas.

Occupy protesters wear out welcome in L.A., Philadelphia

This article talks about the deadlines placed in Los Angeles and Philadelphia for protesters to leave the areas. The people in L.A. that have been camped out for weeks are now being told they must leave their areas in order to preserve "public safety". When asked to leave, the protesters wrote that they would not move unless the power of the few was made to listen to the people.

The 99% are still at it. I cannot believe how strongly willed and determined these people are! They stay at places for weeks because they feel that they are in an unfair economic and social environment. What I think is really cool about this movement is the number of people and places it is happening! This really reminded me of a deadlock in Congress, because neither side, the people or the government, are really willing to budge at this point. I just hope that some sort of resolution is reached, but at this point I am not certain what this could be.

Afghanistan economy will suffer in 2014

This article was about Afghanistan's economy suffering a recession once American troops leave and foriegn aid disapates. Right now the 90% of the countries income comes from foreign aid and a great portion of that is derived from the American military. Afghanistan's national budget is $17.1 billion and the World Bank estimates that anually through 2021, there will be a $7 billion deficit. Afghanistan's government knows that they need the money but doesn't want to seem unable to care for it's own country making humanitarian efforts complicated.

This article suprised me. I knew that Afghanistan was dependent on us but I no idea it would be to this extent. It makes me feel bad for the innocent people of Afghanistan who are going to definatley effected by this. According to the article, the average income of an Afghan is $528. This is already alarmingly low and when American troops leave it'll be even worse. However, I'm conflicted because I do believe that America should try to get out of Afghanistan.

Lawsuit Seeks to Stop State Welfare Agencies from Illegally Forcing Children to Repay Money Paid to Parents

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/lawsuit-seeks-to-stop-state-welfare-agencies-from-illegally-forcing-children-to-repay-money-paid-to-parents-2011-11-23

This article talks about two girls, Irene L. and Jamie Hartley, who are filing a lawsuit against California's practice of making children repay the welfare debts of their parents and guardians. The California Department of Social Services is making the girls pay back the debt even though many believe that this is completely unfair because the girls are already having a hard enough time as it is. Their attorney, Antionette Dozier, flat out thinks what the DSS is doing to children is completely immoral and illegal and that it needs to be stopped immediately.
I agree with everyone against the DSS. Children should not be held responsible for mistakes that were done by their parents or even the DSS since they sometimes gave out too much welfare money. Children are already having a hard time trying to get by on just welfare benefits and on top of that, the DSS is trying to make them pay for debts that aren't even theirs, which I think is completely unfair. The class connection is that the new spending cuts could affect those on welfare.

Ron Paul Ntl Security Debate

http://austin.ynn.com/content/capital_tonight/capital_roundup/281639/national-security-debate-sets-ron-paul-apart-as-different-from-the-pack/

This article is about Ron Paul's national security performance in the national security debate. It talks of how he is against the patriot act and how he believes the US needs to stop trying to get its finger in all of the worlds affairs.

Basically this is great because in that debate Ron got the most applause and he got a lot of air time. He is the best candidate and is the only one with true constitutional values. The problem is that the media doesn't give him any attention, but now hopefully this debate will have helped to get his name out there and maybe it can get the media to focus on him a little more.

To connect this to class, we talked about the medias role in elections and about how media attention can help a candidate gain votes if they get attention or lose votes if they don't get attention.

All in all when it comes down to it Ron Paul is the best presidential candidate due to his strong constitutional values.

Turkey Fryer Risk to National Security?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45419221

This article talks about how national security can be at risk during thanksgiving. Turkey fryers are used by many people during the holidays but they can be dangerous too. The turkey fryer can end up starting a fire if used wrong. These fires can kill or hurt people very badly. They are usually caused by drinking.

This scares me a bit with people drinking this time of the year it can cause fires? So now we have to worry about fires and drunk drivers? It also surprising that something so little can ruin someone's life. I think its good that they are telling people to be safe. I never knew these could cause something so big and dangerous.

Panel's Failure Means Education Cuts in '13

http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/22/supercommittee-impact/?scp=1&sq=college%20funding%20&st=cse

Since there was little agreement on a way to fix the country's budget on Monday, federal programming is automatically being cut starting in 2013. This includes student financial aid programs including the Pell Grant Program. These cuts amount of to $3.54 billion. The Pell Grant Program is exempt for the first year, however. There is also a bill in congress stating that there might be more restrictions for acquiring Pell Grants, and less funding for minority-serving institutions. The bill has not yet been voted on. The bill would keep the Pell Grants steady, but would decrease spending on historically black institutions by 36%. Hispanic institutions would decrease by 83%. There is still talk of avoiding the cuts, but for now they're on.

I think this is ridiculous. It sounds like there are a lot of stubborn people in Congress who can't deal with compromise. It always astounds me when our country just takes money away from education as if it isn't important. Education is what gets our country to improve. You can't be successful without an education. If anything, we should be cutting money from other areas to improve education. I really hope they will avoid some of these cuts. One way I can relate this to class is that we've been talking about Congress and the way they work. It seems to me that there are so many people in Congress, I just don't see how they can elaborate together to make a good decision, and as of Monday, it does not seem like a successful system. Maybe critics are right, it is a lot of rich people who want things there way and are unwilling to compromise for the greater being of our country.

How Religion Influents Political Beliefs

An article on pewforum.org asks the question of how much religion plays a role in political beliefs. In topics such as immigration, same sex marriage, abortion, the death penalty, and government assistance to the poor, numbers were varied but overall people said that their religious views did not influence their beliefs. Same sex marriage had the largest percentage of people stating that religion played the largest role in their views on the subject. One fifths of the people interviewed said their stand on the death penalty was influenced by their beliefs. The article goes on to state that people who vote on a religious standpoint do not have too different of opinions than people who do not.

Since I am not a very religious person, I find it odd that people would vote on their religious views. At the same time, however, I do understand. I think it is more important to vote on your own personal values and morals than the ones of a particular religion. I definitely think that religion and politics need to have their own separate beings because both mixed together can cause some pretty ugly things.
http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Few-Say-Religion-Shapes-Immigration-Environment-Views.aspx

National Security: Medvedev: Russia may target U.S. missile defense sites

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2011-11-23/russia-missile-defense/51365332/

This article was about how Russia has threatened to target U.S. missile shields in Europe if Moscow's concerns about the plan for their creation aren't addressed. The U.S. plan calls for placing land and sea based radars and interceptors in several places in Europe, like Romania and Poland, within the next decade and continuing to upgrade them over time. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev accused the U.S. and its NATO allies of ignoring Russia's worries about said plans, and will follow through with military threats if the missile shield's creation continues without some legal guarantee that the shield will not be aimed against Russia. The U.S. has repeatedly attempted to convince Russia that the proposed missile defense system would not be directed at them, that the system is being designed to "deter and defeat the ballistic missile threat to Europe and to our allies from Iran". However, Russia has declared they will not be satisfied without a binding agreement. Moscow agreed to consider a proposal NATO made to cooperate on the missile shield, but the discussions have been deadlocked over how the system should be run, Russia insisting it be run jointly, which NATO has rejected.

This deadlock between Russia and NATO on the proposal that would ease tensions and introduce some cooperation reminds me of Congress, and how easy it is to enter a deadlock when trying to make decisions on a bill. It specifically makes me think of the Super Committee, and how they were stuck on one or two specific issues that neither were willing to compromise on, which is exactly what is happening with the talks between Russia and NATO.

I can see both sides' arguments. Russia wants written confirmation, guidelines hashed out that will guarantee its own national security with these new missile shield plans, and its leaders can't see why this is such a problem if the U.S. doesn't plan on using the system against them. Then there's the U.S., who knows building the shields will increase their own national security, and assumedly not wanting to restrict their usage before they've even been built. Hearing about things like this, especially after the failure of the super committee, frustrates me sometimes. It seems like such a simple concept, cooperation, or even compromising, each side giving up something for a balance of power, and if everyone would stop being so stubborn, these concepts could be attainable. Then again, I'm not a politician, or a diplomat, and I've obviously never had to deal with the concepts on such a huge scale, so what do I know? Still, it seems like common sense to me.

Rights Destroyed by Racism

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45377371#.Ts2ysT1FuGo

This article brings to light some of the measures that the police, FBI, NSA, and other agencies of the sort have taken since 9/11. It discusses some general measures that have been used toward regular Americans, but mainly focuses on those used toward Muslim Americans. Wiretapping, surveillance, and even infiltration of Muslim groups and communities have become increasingly common. It discusses the Patriot Act briefly, an act that allowed the government to do some searches for records without warrants. A large amount of concern is displayed by citizens, as shown in the article, but members of the government are quoted in saying that they believe that we should do whatever it takes to keep us safe.

Where do I even begin? This article honestly makes me so mad that I'm not even sure what to say. But seriously, how many different constitutional rights are infringed upon by these "security provisions"? We've discussed in class about the 14th amendment- equal rights and protection under the law -and how African Americans have the same rights as Caucasians. However, now that we're discriminating and profiling against Muslim Americans, it seems like that right was thrown straight out the window. We've also talked about how the government can't take lists of names from groups or confidential records, but, thanks to the Patriot Act and new options for surveillance where they can actually stalk all of the members of groups, let's just toss that out the window too! Furthermore, these surveillance measures even attack the first amendment rights to religion. Who in their right mind would feel comfortable expressing or practicing their religion if they knew that it would mean that they'd have the FBI knocking on their door and listening in on all of their phone calls? Don't all Americans have the same rights anymore? Or has it gone so far that no one has any rights? The article makes a reference to past uses of some of these security provisions such as during the Red Scare, but I feel like this situation is starting to slightly resemble Nazi Germany. We're infringing upon the rights of a whole group of people based solely upon their religion and the bad things that a couple of them did. Don't take me wrong, I'm upset about 9/11 too, but I really don't think that attacking all of them, most of which probably sincerely care for America, is the right reaction. Our government shouldn't be punishing the group as a whole and should take a step back and look at them as if they were typical Americans. If they still see a threat in a few people despite the color of their skin and the words they speak in prayer, then, by all means, they can feel free to investigate. However, if a threat is not detected, then they should back off and leave these citizens alone. As a whole, I think that the government needs to take another look at these security provisions and realize that they've gone overboard.

Bikere Ikoba's Thanksgiving Health Care and Environment Blog

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/health/policy/smokers-penalized-with-health-insurance-premiums.html?scp=6&sq=health%20care&st=cse

It is fairly obvious that those who lead unhealthier lifestyles than others will likely have more health problems later in life. Recently, the number of employers who have financially penalized their employees for leading such unhealthy lifestyles (such as being a life-long smoker, or being obese) has been rising. In fact, this number doubles within the past two years, and doesn't show any sign of slowing down anytime soon. The National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans even suggested that employers begin to give their employee's bonuses for maintaining a healthy lifestyle. However, critics of this plan, like the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association, argue that it is unfair for employers to discriminate against unhealthy workers.

I personally found this article rather interesting. I didn't realize that employers even had the option to punish employees for their personal lifestyle. However, it does make sense that individuals who knowingly take advantage of employee benefits, like health care, should be expected to contribute even in the smallest part. If nothing else, such a plan could provide for that needed push for an employee to help themself. This relates back to class in once again displaying how officials can reach into lives of individuals, displaying the constant meshing of the two systems, something our class has been teaching us for the whole quarter.

Happy Thanksgiving :)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2061166/Iran-nuclear-bomb-threat-Russia-China-refuse-Obama.html

China and Russia are staying silent on the issue of Iranian nuclear power. The country of Iran is in possesion of nuclear capabilities. Iran says that the nuclear capabilities will be used only for nuclear power. However, most countries do not believe Iran. Many think that a ratical Islamic country such as Iran would use these nuclear capabilities of create nuclear weapons. President Obama spoke with leaders of both China and Russia asking for their support in stopping the creation of such nuclear facilities. Both China and Russia acknowledged that Iran does have nuclear capabilities but neither said anything to side with the United States on the issue. In response to this, Obama has gone to Pacific Nations such as Australia, Japan, and New Zealand for backing against Iran.

I think that Iran having nuclear capabilities is a major problem. This is a nation that is controlled by a radical Islamic government. Iran vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. If they gain a nuclear weapon, they will follow through on this promise. This will start a Jihad for the holy land and could engulf the entire Middle East into a war. Iran needs to be watched very carefully to make sure that no weapons are created.

Health Care Reform

topics.nytimes.com

This article written on November 15th of this year gives a synopsis of the Health Care Bill. It presented the information included in the bill in layman's terms which is uncommon in most publications available to Americans. This article allowed me to better understand the stance and purpose of the health care reform bill. It improved my knowledge on the matter. Types of articles like these should be more prevelent and should be encouraged by publication corporations. In my opinion it is important to give relevant information in the simplest format in news articles. The way in which information is presented determines the way in which ordinary Americans are capable of interpreting it.

As a class connection, we have discussed the disproportional levels of education among American citizens. We discuss the perspectives on how some Americans can be so ignorant. I believe it is important to consider the educational inclination of citizens when publishing news articles. Companies must be aware of the role they play in molding the opinions of citizens. In general, it is imperative that the media understand and accept their role with caution. Health care is a controversial matter permitting various outlooks. It is my hope that more equivalence can be determined in the educational capabilities of the general public in order to guarantee the appropriate presentation of controversial topics through means of written information.