Land of the Free?

If you are planning a family getaway, vacation, or golf outing you may want to cross the state of New Mexico off your list.  If you do decide to travel to, or through the state, I'd advise using public transportation.  Driving yourself may result in dire, unforeseen consequences.

I don't know what's in the air/water in the town of Deming,NM, but the police have gone insane.  Or perhaps it's something worse; racial discrimination resulting in police brutality w/homosexual overtones.

What follows are the stories of two men, Timothy Young and David Eckert, and the unbelievable ordeals they endured at the hands of the local police.  63 year old David Eckert's day of torture and sexual assault began when he allegedly "rolled through" a stop sign in Deming on Jan 2, 2013.  Officers pulled him over, ordering him to get out of the vehicle.  One of the officers asked to physically search Mr. Eckert's person and he refused to consent, since he had done nothing wrong.  The officers then applied to a county judge to approve a search warrant and authority for a body cavity search, alleging that Mr. Eckert appeared to have "clenched his butt cheeks" and that their K9 "hit" on his car seat (the dog is not certified in drug detection), leading them to believe he could be concealing drugs in his anal cavity.  Based on such a weak standard of "probable cause" the judge approved the warrant.

The officers transported their victim to a local hospital, where the ER doctor refused to perform the procedure, saying it was "unethical".  Undeterred, they then went to the Gila Regional Medical Center, in the process crossing the county line, rendering the warrant invalid.  While at the facility, Mr. Eckert underwent a 12 hour ordeal during which he was forced to undergo 2 x-rays, 2 "digital" anal searches (think, prostate exam), 3 forced enemas & bowel movements, and forced colonoscopy under anesthetic.  NO EVIDENCE OF DRUGS WERE EVER FOUND.



Pouring salt in the wound, he later received a bill from the medical center for $6,000 for the cost of medical procedures he never consented to.  The medical center has also threatened to  take him into collections.  They may sue him for the cost of his humiliation and assault!

Timothy Young's mis-adventure began when he allegedly failed to use his signal when making a turn on October 13, 2013 in Lordsburg, NM.  In the course of working this traffic stop Leo, the same K9 that "hit" on Mr. Eckert's vehicle in January, triggering a search for non-existent drugs, also "hit" on his vehicle.  As in the case with Mr. Eckert, the police "armed with 'probable cause' and a search warrant" took Mr. Young to, again, the Gila Regional Medical Center in Silver City, NM where he was subjected to repeated x-rays and anal cavity searches.  As in the previous case, no evidence of drugs were found and no valid search warrant was in effect.  Both men have filed lawsuits against the police departments, the  judge approving the warrants, and the medical center and it's staff. 

Mr. Eckert's attorney, Albuquerque civil rights attorney Shannon Kennedy, has raised the spectre of racial discrimination in his case, saying "Maybe the officers who did this don't like him living in their community," said Kennedy. "He's a white boy, a scraggly white boy, and all these officers are Hispanic. It's a New Mexico thing."  Atty Kennedy is also representing Mr. Young.

I don't know enough, none of us do, to paint these officers and the department with the racist tar brush; yet.......one has to wonder if there would be such a suspension of judgment if the ethnicity was the reverse, with white officers allegedly mistreating a Hispanic.  Somehow, I have to believe that, if such were the case, there would've been much more national attention brought to bear and the condemnation would've been immediate and widespread.

Lest you believe that you'll be ok on your vacation as long as you avoid Deming, NM, there's this companion story out of El Paso, TX detailing the story of  a New Mexico woman who was allegedly stripped-searched, vaginally probed and then taken to a hospital for more invasive examinations after crossing back into El Paso from Mexico in December.  The biggest difference between this case and the cases in Deming, NM is that the Border Patrol never bothered to seek and obtain a search warrant before taking this woman to the hospital in El Paso, TX where, "after being stripped and vaginally probed, the woman was allegedly subjected to X-rays, scans and a forced bowel movement."  As with the other incidents, NO EVIDENCE OF DRUGS WAS EVER FOUND.

A spokesman for the Border Patrol in El Paso did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the case or on its policies for conducting such searches.

Travelling in the southwest any time soon?  Drive carefully, obey all traffic laws, remember to ALWAYS use your turn signal, and no day trips into Mexico for souvenirs. 

 

In Obamacare We Trust (Not so much)

The slow motion train wreck which is the roll out of the mis-named "Affordable Care Act" continues.

At the time I'm writing this, the entire site has "gone dark" in order to effect repairs to the more than 500 million lines of code.  Not to worry, though.  Obama promises that his administration will have everything up and running by the end of November, the fact they've been working on the site for more than three years already notwithstanding......

It's clear to most (other than the usual statist cheerleaders) that Obamacare can never work as advertised; that perhaps it was never intended to.  Many have begun to join the "conspiracy theorists" in positing that the failure of Obamacare and the resulting chaos is fully intended, that it was designed to engender such outrage, consternation and fear in those who rely on health insurance that the country would clamor for the creation of "single-payer", government-run insurance (Medicare for all).  Even the heretofore reliably enthusiastic mainstream press has begun to report stories on the debacle that is the ACA; from hugely increasing premiums and deductibles, to doctors and entire healthcare organizations deciding to forego participation, to states declining Obama's "generous" offer of 100% federal funding (for the first three years) if they will only agree to a massive expansion of Medicaid rolls.

Many outlets (not just Fox News) are reporting on and highlighting the many lies of Obamacare.  From the promises "If you like your current health plan you can keep it." to "My plan will lower premiums $2500/yr for the average family." to "This plan will not affect anyone who currently gets their insurance through their employer.", the President is finally being called on his "misstatements".

When chief Obama advisor (who many say is the true "power behind the throne") Valerie Jarrett made the outrageous claim that the fault lied with the insurance companies, that nothing in the ACA forced them to cancel policies and increase premiums, she was quickly called on her lie.  It was pointed out that the ACA actually forces insurance companies to cancel policies it deems "inadequate", regardless of whether the subscriber who chose that particular plan was happy with it or not, and requires them to offer so-called "comprehensive" care plans which are much more expensive to run and administer.  I guess Obama and his followers think that the insurance companies should take it upon themselves to underwrite the increased costs of the Obamacare-required plans out of the goodness of their hearts?  (Wait a minute!  Obama, and others, have gone on record decrying what "greedy insurance companies" have done to American healthcare.  According to them, insurance companies don't have a heart.)

Obama, himself has had to address his past statements and has attempted to "walk back" what he said.  He and his spokespeople have taken to saying that the plans that are being cancelled are "substandard" and that what he meant was that if you had adequate insurance that you liked you could keep that plan.  What has only gotten limited play so far in the media is the fact that, less than six months after the passage of the ACA, achieved through the promises of the administration, there was a small alteration made through the regulatory process of HHS that severely reinterpreted the clause that allowed for the grandfathering of existing healthcare plans.  This new regulation that wasn't subject to congressional review specified that such grandfathering would only apply as long as the plans remained "unaltered".   Any alteration (apparently even those required by Obamacare) would void the grandfathering provision.  Under the definitions of alterations, ANY change in the plan would void their protections.  Any change in coverages, coverage limits, premiums, co-pays, or insurance providers will invalidate "grandfathered" status even if such changes amounted to improvements and would be beneficial to subscribers!

However, there is ONE segment of the health insurance industry that will be largely unaffected by the change in the grandfathering provisions of Obamacare:  UNIONS.  Yep, that's right.  Buried deep in the legalese is a provision included in the HHS rulemaking that specifically excludes from potential loss of grandfathered status "plans that are the result of collective bargaining".  If you are a member of a union and changes to your healthcare coverage are negotiated as part of your overall package in collective bargaining agreements, the legal requirement that such a change force participation in the Obamacare exchange doesn't apply.  It appears that all the fuss earlier this year by unions, complaining that they should be exempted from Obamacare taxes and surcharges and that their earlier exemption, obtained in return for their support of Obamacare, should be made permanent, along with the "big news" that they were denied any extension of their waiver was largely a smokescreen.

Here's a pull quote from an article sent out to HR officers in June of 2010:

"Unlike the normal grandfathering rules that apply to other group health plans, changing the insurance issuer during the period of a collective bargaining agreement will not cause an insured union-negotiated health plan to lose it's grandfathered status."

So.  If you like your current plan, you can keep it.  Not so much.
If you like your doctor, you can keep seeing him.  Not so much.
Your premiums will be reduced by about $2500 per year.  Not so much.
If you get your insurance through your employer, nothing will change.  Not so much.
The ACA will lower costs by fostering competition.  Not so much.

Obamacare:  an improvement in management and delivery of American healthcare.  Not so much.