It’s difficult to turn on the television or read an article on the Internet without hearing about the Ebola virus.
Recently, President Barack Obama, assured the American public when he said, “First and foremost, I want the American people to know that our experts, here at the CDC and across our government, agree that the chances of an Ebola outbreak here in the United States are extremely low.”
He further guaranteed Americans that his administration was taking precautions and working with countries in West Africa to ensure that someone with the virus wouldn’t be able to get on a plane bound for the United States.
Obama went a step further to say, “In the unlikely event that someone with Ebola does reach our shores, we’ve taken new measures so that we’re prepared here at home.”
All of the words, meant to comfort and convince the public that they are safe, fell by the wayside when a man recently traveled from Liberia and allegedly failed to reveal on a healthcare questionnaire that he had been in contact with someone stricken with Ebola.
There is another confirmed case of Ebola and several cases being watched that have American’s on-edge.
A freelance reporter for NBC has been diagnosed with Ebola after returning from Liberia and now there are concerns that three additional cases may show positive results for the Ebola virus.
Washington, D.C., Utah, and Hawaii, have enacted quarantines because they suspect patients may have the virus. However, Hawaii’s State Department of Health, now feels confident that they have ruled out the possibility of Ebola with their patient.
Many Americans are beginning to voice their concerns about the spread of Ebola and are calling for Obama to restrict travel from countries in West Africa because of the potential threat to U.S. citizens.
So far, Obama has not deemed it necessary to curtail travel from countries in West Africa to the U.S.
Must the U.S. wait for Obama to decide if restricting travel into the U.S. from those countries with Ebola is a threat to America or is there another solution?
There have been those critical of the U.S. Congress for surrendering their power, under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, especially when it comes to matters of national security.
In 2005, then Sen. Barack Obama, wrote to his Senate colleagues, vehemently opposing the extensive wire-tapping powers given to then President George W. Bush by Congress, under the provisions of the Patriot Act.
Obama argued that the provision was a “sweeping power never authorized in any context by Congress before the Patriot Act.” It was his opinion that Congress had relinquished too much of its own legislative power to the executive branch.
Obama’s concern now seems contrary to his current use of a “pen and phone” to extend his presidential powers to include, what some believe, are powers designated only to Congress.
Written by: THE COMMON SENSE SHOWshared by DAVID HODGES – continue reading on