Cyber Attack!

The editorial, Hidden dangers — allowing more government snooping — lurk in new cyber security bill, argues that we should know what our government law makers are planning to do.  The purpose of  the cyber security Information Sharing Act of 2015 is to increase information sharing with the private sector to help prevent attacks on the nation’s cyber network.  The journalist,  as a part of The Dallas Morning News, claims the government should explain to the people why they are capturing this information.  

Although I don’t have much knowledge about this bill, I think the journalist explains the details to the best of their analysis.  The article shows supporting details by stating facts on the cyber network attacks on Sony Entertainment and the Federal Office Personnel Management.  At one point, in the article it states that the bill would reduce private companies liabilities and increase their incentives.  However, the paragraph that states that they “ had some big problems with the wording” is confusing and is unclear as to what point they were trying to get across.

I completely understand the reasons why we need higher security protocols for the nations cyber network.  Our nation has been under attack and it has put many of our citizens and businesses at risk.  Think about what would happen if our nations cyber network was compromised on a much higher level.  The outcome could be detrimental to our country.  I agree with journalist that the government should really consider the voice of the people and at the very least let be known what the government plans to do.   

State decides to end contract with Planned Parenthood

Julie Chang posted an article in the Austin American Statesman that reads “Austin lawmakers question why state cut HIV-prevention program”.  On December 21st the Department of State Services announced that the Plan Parenthood affiliate in Houston will no longer be receiving funds from the government.  This ended a 30 year contract and $600,000 received annually from the state to provide testing and care for HIV.  What is concerning to me is the fact that people rely on these services.  They were notified 10 days before the contract was due to end.  Who will serve the needs of the people that come to the clinic for care.  I see this limiting healthcare options for people that truly need it.  In the past, the state has also pulled other programs from Plan Parenthood.  Maybe the state feels that Plan Parenthood isn’t the best option for their funding.  While I agreed that the state should represent a program that promotes health and safety I don’t agree with the state canceling the contract last minute.  Think about if you just found out you were HIV positive and have no insurance?