Wednesday, June 29, 2011
NOW Conference Condemns War on Women, Calls for Better Social Security Benefits and 'Medicare for All'
The National Organization for Women wrapped up its 45th National Conference in Tampa, Fla. on Sunday, June 26, setting NOW's policy and agenda for the coming year and looking toward the 2012 elections and beyond. Topping NOW's policy agenda are improved Social Security benefits for women and a "Medicare for All" single-payer health care system as the solution to our health and fiscal crisis, including supporting Sen. Bernie Sanders' American Health Security Act of 2011 (S 915).
"Women need jobs, not cuts," said NOW President Terry O'Neill. "We oppose any cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and any health benefits derived from the Social Security Act. And candidates who want women's support need to stand with us in support of single-payer healthcare legislation on the state and federal levels."
Celebrations erupted throughout the conference when the New York state senate passed the marriage equality bill by a 33-29 vote. "This was a historic moment," said O'Neill, "New York is the largest state to recognize same-sex marriage and we want other states to follow suit quickly. I'm proud of NOW's long-standing support for LGBT rights and even prouder that the conference passed a resolution calling for stepped-up activism for marriage equality."
Other resolutions passed on the final day of the conference included pressing for reproductive civil rights legislation, using Title IX action networks to help end sex discrimination in education, ensuring inclusion of women and girls with disabilities in the U.S. Department of State programming and more.
The conference presenters, speakers and honorees, who included influential women in politics, groundbreaking activists and leaders in the medical field, were inspiring and motivating to the hundreds of NOW leaders gathered in Tampa.
O'Neill concluded: "The energy of the women that filled the rooms made this year's NOW conference one to remember. I'm thrilled by the success of our gathering, and re-energized to win women's longtime struggle for equality."
MegaVote: SC 1st, 6/27/2011
Recent Congressional Votes
Upcoming Congressional Bills
Editor's Note: The House is in recess this week. | |
| Recent Senate Votes | |
Confirmation of Leon E. Panetta to be Secretary of Defense - Vote Confirmed (100-0) Current CIA Director Leon E. Panetta was confirmed to be the next Secretary of Defense. Panetta succeeds Secretary Robert Gates, who is retiring at the end of June. Sen. Lindsey Graham voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Sen. Jim DeMint voted YES......send e-mail or see bio | |
| Recent House Votes | |
| Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011 - Vote Passed (253-166, 12 Not Voting) This House bill would require the EPA to complete action within six months on air pollution permit applications for offshore oil and gas drilling. A companion measure has been introduced in the Senate but its future is unclear. The administration opposes the bill. Rep. Tim Scott voted YES......send e-mail or see bio America Invents Act - Vote Passed (304-117, 10 Not Voting) The House passed this bill that would make changes to the patent system. The Senate passed its version of the bill in March 2011. Negotiators will likely meet this summer to work out a compromise bill. The administration has expressed support for the House bill. Rep. Tim Scott voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Authorizing the limited use of the United States Armed Forces in support of the NATO mission in Libya - Vote Failed (123-295, 13 Not Voting) The House rejected a resolution that would have authorized the use of U.S. military force in Libya for one year. Rep. Tim Scott voted NO......send e-mail or see bio To limit the use of funds to support NATO Operation Unified Protector with respect to Libya - Vote Failed (180-238, 13 Not Voting) The House rejected this bill that would have defunded U.S. military involvement in NATO activities in Libya. U.S. participation would have been restricted to support operations such as intelligence, surveillance, and search and rescue. Rep. Tim Scott voted NO......send e-mail or see bio | |
| Upcoming Votes | |
| Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 - S.679 The Senate is scheduled to work on this bill to reduce the number of executive branch appointments that require Senate confirmation. | |
Monday, June 27, 2011
Walmart and Sam's Club Associates Could Give South Carolina's Children a BIG Win
COLUMBIA, SC - June 27, 2011 - The Children's Trust of South Carolina (CTSC) is pleased to announce it has been selected as one of five South Carolina nonprofit organizations to compete in the Walmart Associate Choice Program. Now through August 6, 2011, every Walmart and Sam's Club associate in every state across the country will use their employee benefits website (www.mywalmart.com) to vote for the local charitable causes most important to them. The organization winning the most votes for their state receives a $100,000 grant.
Sue Williams, CEO of CTSC sees this as the perfect opportunity for Walmart's South Carolina associates to invest in the well-being of the state's children. She states, "We are honored to have been selected to compete for this opportunity. The Walmart Foundation is giving its associates a chance to make a tremendous difference in their local communities; and in the case of associates in South Carolina, they are being given the opportunity to ensure all of our state's children have a safe place to sleep."
If selected as the Walmart Associate Choice winner for the state of South Carolina, CTSC plans to use the funding to expand the initiatives of one of its newest programs: Cribs for Kids® South Carolina, a safe-sleep education program working to reduce the risk of infant injury and death due to unsafe sleeping environments. "South Carolina ranks 45th in the nation for overall child well-being, and accidental suffocation is the leading cause of unintentional injury death among infants in the United States," informs Williams. She adds, "Over the past decade, hundreds of South Carolina's children, age 0-1 year, have suffered death due to suffocation because of improper sleeping environments. Especially heartbreaking is that in many cases, new parents were not provided the knowledge or the proper equipment to protect their children."
The Cribs for Kids® program, operates off the guiding principle behind all CTSC programs and initiatives - equipping South Carolina's families with the education and tools they need to strengthen their lives and the lives of their children. The Cribs for Kids® program does this by providing invaluable safe-sleep educational training to parents and grandparents through which they learn important tactics to protect their infants. Upon completion of this training, a Graco Pack 'n Play is provided at no cost to families who could not otherwise afford a safe place for their infants to sleep. The Cribs for Kids® program has the potential to help South Carolina families prevent the unnecessary and tragic deaths of the state's children.
CTSC leads its Cribs for Kids® initiative through the organization's Safe Kids South Carolina program. "Through the concept of encouraging parents to practice child safety At Home, At Play and On the Way, our Safe Kids South Carolina program has enabled us to educate parents on a variety of child safety issues," states Williams. "Now, we need to ensure that every baby in our state has a safe place to sleep. We're excited that South Carolina's Walmart and Sam's Club associates have the opportunity to help us accomplish this goal," asserts Williams.
The Children's Trust of South Carolina is the only statewide non-profit organization committed to the prevention of child abuse and neglect by promoting healthy, nurturing relationships between children and adults. Our vision is that every child will grow up in a safe, loving and stable environment. To learn more about The Children's Trust, please visit our website at www.scchildren.org.
SC Advocates Must Weigh-in with Reps. Chris Van Hollen, Steny Hoyer AND The White House to Protect Safety Net Programs
South Carolina Advocates Must Weigh-in with Rep. James Clyburn AND the White House to Protect Safety Net Programs -- Including SNAP/Food Stamps and Child Nutrition –as Discussions Heat Up on Raising the Debt Ceiling/Reducing the Deficit
As you know, President Obama, Vice President Biden and a bi-partisan group of Congressional leaders, including Rep. Clyburn, are negotiating a debt-ceiling/deficit reduction plan and hope to reach an agreement in the coming weeks. At the top of the agenda is securing $4 trillion in savings from program cuts over the next 10 or 12 years. Whether or not revenues will be part of the final plan is also in play. Anti-hunger advocates are demanding that negotiations follow a key principle included in the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform’s plan (Bowles-Simpson): protect programs for low-income families and individuals, like SNAP/Food Stamps and Child Nutrition, and make sure that the deficit reduction is achieved in a way that does not increase poverty.
Please take these actions immediately to demonstrate your support for responsible long-term deficit reduction through a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts that do not harm the poor and vulnerable.
Background:
As a key player in the ongoing budget negotiations, anti-hunger advocates must contact Rep. Clyburn to urge him to protect SNAP/Food Stamps, Child Nutrition and other safety net programs during the debt ceiling negotiations. Decisions are happening now!
Actions Needed:
1. Call Rep. James Clyburn at (202) 225- 3315, or call toll-free: 1-888-907-1485 which will connect you to the Capitol Switchboard.
2. Contact the White House (President Obama and Vice President Biden). E-mail or call toll-free: 1-888-245-0215.
Message: Any deficit reduction plan must protect programs for low-income families and individuals -- such as the nutrition programs like SNAP/Food Stamps and Child Nutrition -- and must also include new revenues. The plan should reduce poverty and help the disadvantaged, even as it attempts to shrink the deficit. Low-income assistance programs, like SNAP/Food Stamps and Child Nutrition, must be exempt from any caps and automatic across-the-board cuts which could be triggered when budget targets or fiscal restraint rules are missed or violated.
Please take these actions immediately to demonstrate your support for responsible long-term deficit reduction through a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts that do not harm the poor and vulnerable.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
People for the American Way present RecallTheRight.org
| |
The extreme right-wing group Club For Growth is already on the air in Wisconsin with attack ads against at least one Democratic challenger to one of the incumbent Republican senators in the recall elections. Daily Kos blogger Vega, who lives just over the border in Minnesota but in the same media market as Wisconsin's 10th Senate District, wrote of this early spending:
"After 30 years of tax policy favoring them, the richest Americans have almost all the money in the country, and they are willing to wield it like a sledgehammer to kill a fly. That is how important Wisconsin is to the right wing. They don't want any of their gains to be rolled back and they are willing to spend whatever it takes to keep them. They don't want even a temporary setback in their march to domination."Vega's absolutely right. And this is just the beginning.
PFAW has a plan to win the persuadable, likely Wisconsin voters we need for the big victories in August. This past Tuesday night, our political director Randy Borntrager, along with the SEIU's Michelle Ringuette and PFAW president Michael Keegan, held a strategy telebriefing for hundreds of PFAW members. We'll have plenty more ways for activists to get involved on the horizon.
For now, please take a moment to find out more about PFAW's Wisconsin Recall the Right campaign at www.RecallTheRight.org.
-- Ben Betz, Online Strategy Manager
Friday, June 24, 2011
Republicans Dupe South Carolina With 'Spending Cap' Talk
Congress is considering a range of policies to limit, or “cap,” overall federal spending, either as stand-alone legislation, or as part of a balanced budget amendment. Supporters argue that these efforts are necessary to reduce the deficit and to impose limits on current and future Congresses.
One such proposal is the Commitment to Prosperity (CAP Act), sponsored by Senators Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), along with 14 other senators. The CAP Act (S. 245) would create hard caps on government spending, to be phased in over 10 years (2013–2022). In 2022 and subsequent years, the Act would cap spending at 20.6% of gross domestic product, based on the bill’s formula and assumptions.
This policy memorandum shows the possible impact of overall spending caps on the elderly through reductions in Social Security payments and on communities through decreases in federal outlays. It analyzes the impact nationally and within states and congressional districts. The memorandum also briefly reviews the even more dire cuts to Social Security under a proposed balanced budget amendment.
Read policy memo
Supplemental Table to Unbalanced Budgeting Policy Memorandum
One such proposal is the Commitment to Prosperity (CAP Act), sponsored by Senators Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), along with 14 other senators. The CAP Act (S. 245) would create hard caps on government spending, to be phased in over 10 years (2013–2022). In 2022 and subsequent years, the Act would cap spending at 20.6% of gross domestic product, based on the bill’s formula and assumptions.
This policy memorandum shows the possible impact of overall spending caps on the elderly through reductions in Social Security payments and on communities through decreases in federal outlays. It analyzes the impact nationally and within states and congressional districts. The memorandum also briefly reviews the even more dire cuts to Social Security under a proposed balanced budget amendment.
Read policy memo
Supplemental Table to Unbalanced Budgeting Policy Memorandum
Medicaid Cuts and State Economies – No One Wins
In previous emails, we have let you know about the proposal passed by the United States House of Representatives that would make significant changes in the Medicaid program. Millions of children rely on Medicaid to keep them healthy and we are concerned that these plans by politicians in Washington DC will make it harder for them to receive the care they need.
Not only will children be harmed if these plans become law, parents will lose jobs and state economies, already fragile, could be decimated. In the newly-released report, “Jobs At Risk: Federal Medicaid Cuts Would Harm State Economies,” Families USA explains that the proposed Medicaid cuts in the Ryan budget, in addition to taking their toll on program enrollees, would seriously harm state economies.
“Every federal Medicaid dollar that flows into a state stimulates business activity and generates jobs. The loss of federal funding means there will be fewer dollars circulating through each state’s economy, as well as fewer dollars passing from one person to another in successive rounds of spending that drive economic growth. This loss of the ‘economic multiplier effect” that states would experience as a direct result of federal Medicaid cuts would be large and much greater than the amount of the dollar cuts themselves.”
Using the RIMS II input-output model (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis) and working with the Merrick School of Business at the University of Baltimore, Families USA calculated how the proposed cuts of 5% by 2013, 15% in 2014, and approx. 33% at the end of 10 years would affect each state’s loss of business activities and jobs if they were enacted in 2011.
For example, in 2011, a 5% cut in federal Medicaid spending would mean $13.75 billion in dollars at risk nationally (50 states plus DC); a 15% cut would result in $41.25 billion at risk, and a 33% cut would result in a whopping $90.75 billion at risk. Jobs would be lost in every state and the District, with New York, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, Michigan, and Massachusetts taking the biggest hits.
To see how your state would fare, see the state by state breakdown in the full report here
There are many other ways that the nation’s medical bills could be reduced, while still providing health care to all citizens, other than the block grant, cost-shifting proposal advanced by Cong. Ryan. After all, many other rich democracies show much better health outcomes than the U.S., and succeed in doing so at about half the U.S’s per capita cost.
While these cuts were voted down in the United States Senate last month, we are concerned they could be added in to the debt deal being negotiated between the White House and members of Congress. They must come to an agreement on raising the debt ceiling by the end of next month.
You can fight these dangerous ideas. Click here to contact your Senators and tell them that any budget or debt deal should not cut Medicaid. They need to hear from you.
Michael Petit
President
Every Child Matters Education Fund
Not only will children be harmed if these plans become law, parents will lose jobs and state economies, already fragile, could be decimated. In the newly-released report, “Jobs At Risk: Federal Medicaid Cuts Would Harm State Economies,” Families USA explains that the proposed Medicaid cuts in the Ryan budget, in addition to taking their toll on program enrollees, would seriously harm state economies.
“Every federal Medicaid dollar that flows into a state stimulates business activity and generates jobs. The loss of federal funding means there will be fewer dollars circulating through each state’s economy, as well as fewer dollars passing from one person to another in successive rounds of spending that drive economic growth. This loss of the ‘economic multiplier effect” that states would experience as a direct result of federal Medicaid cuts would be large and much greater than the amount of the dollar cuts themselves.”
Using the RIMS II input-output model (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis) and working with the Merrick School of Business at the University of Baltimore, Families USA calculated how the proposed cuts of 5% by 2013, 15% in 2014, and approx. 33% at the end of 10 years would affect each state’s loss of business activities and jobs if they were enacted in 2011.
For example, in 2011, a 5% cut in federal Medicaid spending would mean $13.75 billion in dollars at risk nationally (50 states plus DC); a 15% cut would result in $41.25 billion at risk, and a 33% cut would result in a whopping $90.75 billion at risk. Jobs would be lost in every state and the District, with New York, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, Michigan, and Massachusetts taking the biggest hits.
To see how your state would fare, see the state by state breakdown in the full report here
There are many other ways that the nation’s medical bills could be reduced, while still providing health care to all citizens, other than the block grant, cost-shifting proposal advanced by Cong. Ryan. After all, many other rich democracies show much better health outcomes than the U.S., and succeed in doing so at about half the U.S’s per capita cost.
While these cuts were voted down in the United States Senate last month, we are concerned they could be added in to the debt deal being negotiated between the White House and members of Congress. They must come to an agreement on raising the debt ceiling by the end of next month.
You can fight these dangerous ideas. Click here to contact your Senators and tell them that any budget or debt deal should not cut Medicaid. They need to hear from you.
Michael Petit
President
Every Child Matters Education Fund
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Rep. Mia Butler Garrick to Host Public Safety Forums in partnership with SLED, Richland County Sheriff's Office, 5th Circuit Solicitor's Office
State Representative Mia Butler Garrick (D - Richland and Kershaw Co.) will kickoff a public safety awareness initiative in Northeast Richland County. SLED Chief Reggie Lloyd, Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott, 5th Circuit Solicitor Dan Johnson and State Senator Joel Lourie are co-hosts for the upcoming event and a similar forum will soon be held in Kershaw County.
The goal of the forums is to create an open dialogue with the public regarding public safety issues that impact NE Columbia and surrounding communities. Information exchanged during these discussions will be vital to Rep. Butler Garrick and her co-hosts in their efforts to keep our neighborhoods, communities and residents safe. All members of the public are encouraged to attend.
The forum will be held on Wednesday, June 29th at six o’clock in the evening, at the Lake House on Clemson Road (Clemson Extension).
The goal of the forums is to create an open dialogue with the public regarding public safety issues that impact NE Columbia and surrounding communities. Information exchanged during these discussions will be vital to Rep. Butler Garrick and her co-hosts in their efforts to keep our neighborhoods, communities and residents safe. All members of the public are encouraged to attend.
The forum will be held on Wednesday, June 29th at six o’clock in the evening, at the Lake House on Clemson Road (Clemson Extension).
| Who | Rep. Mia Butler Garrick, SLED Chief Reggie Lloyd, Sheriff Leon Lott, Solicitor Dan Johnson, Sen. Joel Lourie and the People of Richland County |
| What | Public Safety Town Hall Forum |
| Where | Clemson Road Extension’s Lake House 900 Clemson Road Columbia, SC 29229 |
| When | June 29th, 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m |
Nikki Haley is in Paris, South Carolina's unemployment rate is 9.8%
South Carolina Democratic Chairman, Dick Harpootlian, released this video and made this statement about her trip:
"Most South Carolinians are spending the summer working hard to put grits and groceries on the table while Nikki Haley is dining on snails and champaign in Paris on our dime. Only six months into four years of Nikki Haley and she has demonstrated time and time again she isn't listening to the people of South Carolina. Of course, if we wanted to talk to her it would be an international long distance call. Help us send her a message. Contribute to the South Carolina Democratic Party and we will speak loud enough for you to be heard."
Nikki in Paris
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Help for Unemployed Homeowners On Its Way
This week, homeowners in 33 states will be able to begin applying for a new $1 billion federal loan program to help those who are in danger of losing their homes due to involuntary unemployment or underemployment.
PICO helped lead the fight to win this new program – the Emergency Homeowner Loan Program – and has been working hard to get it up and running as quickly as possible. Now, we want to make sure that as many borrowers as possible receive assistance.
The application process is only open through July 22, so it’s important that we spread the word quickly!
Tell your friends, family and community members that they can find the application materials, as well as more information about what states are part of the program and who qualifies, at www.nw.org/network/
Fifteen million Americans continue to face unemployment, another ten million are working fewer hours than they would like, and countless more are earning less money than they did before the recession.
If you’re working hard trying to find a job, you shouldn’t also have to also worry about losing your home. That’s what this program will begin to do for many homeowners.
Help us make it a success. Spread the word today.
Thank you,
PICO National Network
PICO helped lead the fight to win this new program – the Emergency Homeowner Loan Program – and has been working hard to get it up and running as quickly as possible. Now, we want to make sure that as many borrowers as possible receive assistance.
The application process is only open through July 22, so it’s important that we spread the word quickly!
Tell your friends, family and community members that they can find the application materials, as well as more information about what states are part of the program and who qualifies, at www.nw.org/network/
Fifteen million Americans continue to face unemployment, another ten million are working fewer hours than they would like, and countless more are earning less money than they did before the recession.
If you’re working hard trying to find a job, you shouldn’t also have to also worry about losing your home. That’s what this program will begin to do for many homeowners.
Help us make it a success. Spread the word today.
Thank you,
PICO National Network
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
South Carolina Voters Association asks that you help support Ms. Kenisha Williams
The South Carolina Voters Association wants to congratulate one of its very own; Ms. Kenisha Williams, who has been accepted into the Women's Campaign School at Yale University.
Of the 124 members serving in the SC House of Representatives, only 16 are women. Currently, there are no women serving in the State Senate. And, there are no women representing South Carolina in the US Congress or US Senate.
Ms. Williams' journey to success has just begun! She is going to need our genuine thoughts, prayers and an ultimate display of our support. Join me in seeing her dream become reality. Below, please find a direct link to her 'go fund me' account. Any amount is welcomed. Your contribution is a gift and your efforts will help shape not only her future but the future of our state! Together we will make this happen. For more information or to make a secure donation, please go to: http://www.gofundme.com/
Michael Bailey
State Director
South Carolina Voters Association
SCVA
Facebook
Phone: 803.658.VOTE (8683)
Email: mb@scvotersvoice.org
P.O. Box 3366 Columbia, SC 29230
DOMA is Indefensible - A Message from Melanie Sloan
I’m Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
I wanted to take a minute to thank you for joining us last week when we filed a complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) against House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) for violating the Antideficiency Act by pledging to spend $500,000 to defend the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act.
If you're having trouble watching the video, click here to read a transcript on our website.
Thank you,
Melanie
Melanie
Women at Walmart Deserve Better
Too big for justice?
Unfortunately, that’s the message the U.S. Supreme Court sent to Walmart Associates yesterday fighting for equal treatment and fair pay on the job.
In a sharply divided opinion in the Dukes v. Walmart case, the Court made it harder for 1.6 million current and former female Walmart Associates to join together to challenge widespread unfair pay and discrimination claims against the company in a single lawsuit.
The Court didn’t say that the women where not discriminated against. It simply made it harder for them to get justice.
Walmart Associates from across the country are forming the Organization United for Respect at Walmart. Part of their “Declaration of Respect” calls on Walmart to “adopt affirmative policies that secure full access to opportunity and equal treatment to all Associates regardless of gender, race, disability or age.”
Tell Associates you stand with them in their work to hold Walmart accountable by signing this petition.
For too long women at Walmart have been treated unfairly. When this case was filed in 2001, female employees earned $5,200 less per year than men and were disproportionately represented in the lowest paid positions.
Walmart says it has cleaned up its act, but the stories we hear from Associates inside stores across the country paint a very different picture of unfair treatment and favoritism on the job.
Fight back against Walmart. Show Walmart Associates you stand with them and not with Walmart.
Sincerely,
Kerri Axelrod
Walmart Watch
In a sharply divided opinion in the Dukes v. Walmart case, the Court made it harder for 1.6 million current and former female Walmart Associates to join together to challenge widespread unfair pay and discrimination claims against the company in a single lawsuit.
The Court didn’t say that the women where not discriminated against. It simply made it harder for them to get justice.
Walmart Associates from across the country are forming the Organization United for Respect at Walmart. Part of their “Declaration of Respect” calls on Walmart to “adopt affirmative policies that secure full access to opportunity and equal treatment to all Associates regardless of gender, race, disability or age.”
Tell Associates you stand with them in their work to hold Walmart accountable by signing this petition.
For too long women at Walmart have been treated unfairly. When this case was filed in 2001, female employees earned $5,200 less per year than men and were disproportionately represented in the lowest paid positions.
Walmart says it has cleaned up its act, but the stories we hear from Associates inside stores across the country paint a very different picture of unfair treatment and favoritism on the job.
Fight back against Walmart. Show Walmart Associates you stand with them and not with Walmart.
Sincerely,
Kerri Axelrod
Walmart Watch
Americans United And ACLU File Lawsuit To Block Voucher Plan That Would Fund Religious Schools In Colorado
Three civil liberties organizations filed suit today in Denver District Court to challenge a school voucher plan adopted by the Douglas County School District.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado and the American Civil Liberties Union sued on behalf of a group of parents, clergy and other taxpayers who oppose the program’s effort to divert taxpayer money to primarily religious, private schools.
Through its “Pilot Choice Scholarship Plan,” the district plans to designate up to 500 children as “public school students” in order to obtain state per-pupil educational funds, which are earmarked for the public school system. The district then plans to use the taxpayer dollars to subsidize the students’ tuition at approved “Private School Partners.”
As of the filing of the lawsuit, 14 of the approved 19 Private School Partners are religious. Only three of the five non-religious Private School Partners are open to all students, and they do not offer education beyond the eighth grade.
Highlighting the religious liberty concerns raised by the program, Americans United for Separation of Church and State Executive Director Barry W. Lynn, explained, “Vouchers are nothing more than a backdoor way of forcing taxpayers to support religious schools. Douglas County’s reckless plan threatens church-state separation and public education and should be struck down.”
Mark Silverstein, ACLU of Colorado Legal Director, said, “This lawsuit challenges a scheme to violate the letter and spirit of Colorado school finance statutes as well as state constitutional provisions governing public education and religious liberty. The school district will collect money from the state of Colorado and deliver some of those funds to private schools to subsidize students’ tuition payments. Thus, taxpayer funds allocated for public education will be diverted from their intended purpose. We are asking the court to stop this misguided program before it goes any further.”
The LaRue v. Colorado Board of Education lawsuit argues that the voucher plan violates the Colorado Constitution’s religious liberty provisions, which bar the appropriation of public funds to religious schools. The lawsuit also claims that the program violates Colorado constitutional provisions and statutes that require educational funds to pay for public education and remain under government control.
Heather L. Weaver, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, agreed. “While families have the right to decide where their children should attend school, the state cannot finance religious education at private institutions,” she said. “Public education funds should be dedicated to improving our public schools, not promoting and subsidizing religion in violation of the State Constitution.”
The lawsuit asks the Court to enjoin the program and declare it unlawful. As summed up by plaintiff James LaRue, “This program harms both religious liberty and public education. Douglas County and Colorado citizens deserve better in both regards.”
In addition to the school district, the Colorado Board of Education and the Colorado Department of Education, which assisted the district in developing the program and have approved the misguided financial arrangement, are named as defendants.
The Plaintiffs are represented by Silverstein and Rebecca T. Wallace of the ACLU of Colorado; Ayesha N. Khan and Gregory M. Lipper of Americans United for Separation of Church and State; Weaver and Daniel Mach of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief; and Matthew J. Douglas, Timothy R. Macdonald, Michelle K. Albert, Paul Alexander, and George Langendorf of Arnold & Porter LLP, cooperating counsel.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado and the American Civil Liberties Union sued on behalf of a group of parents, clergy and other taxpayers who oppose the program’s effort to divert taxpayer money to primarily religious, private schools.
Through its “Pilot Choice Scholarship Plan,” the district plans to designate up to 500 children as “public school students” in order to obtain state per-pupil educational funds, which are earmarked for the public school system. The district then plans to use the taxpayer dollars to subsidize the students’ tuition at approved “Private School Partners.”
As of the filing of the lawsuit, 14 of the approved 19 Private School Partners are religious. Only three of the five non-religious Private School Partners are open to all students, and they do not offer education beyond the eighth grade.
Highlighting the religious liberty concerns raised by the program, Americans United for Separation of Church and State Executive Director Barry W. Lynn, explained, “Vouchers are nothing more than a backdoor way of forcing taxpayers to support religious schools. Douglas County’s reckless plan threatens church-state separation and public education and should be struck down.”
Mark Silverstein, ACLU of Colorado Legal Director, said, “This lawsuit challenges a scheme to violate the letter and spirit of Colorado school finance statutes as well as state constitutional provisions governing public education and religious liberty. The school district will collect money from the state of Colorado and deliver some of those funds to private schools to subsidize students’ tuition payments. Thus, taxpayer funds allocated for public education will be diverted from their intended purpose. We are asking the court to stop this misguided program before it goes any further.”
The LaRue v. Colorado Board of Education lawsuit argues that the voucher plan violates the Colorado Constitution’s religious liberty provisions, which bar the appropriation of public funds to religious schools. The lawsuit also claims that the program violates Colorado constitutional provisions and statutes that require educational funds to pay for public education and remain under government control.
Heather L. Weaver, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, agreed. “While families have the right to decide where their children should attend school, the state cannot finance religious education at private institutions,” she said. “Public education funds should be dedicated to improving our public schools, not promoting and subsidizing religion in violation of the State Constitution.”
The lawsuit asks the Court to enjoin the program and declare it unlawful. As summed up by plaintiff James LaRue, “This program harms both religious liberty and public education. Douglas County and Colorado citizens deserve better in both regards.”
In addition to the school district, the Colorado Board of Education and the Colorado Department of Education, which assisted the district in developing the program and have approved the misguided financial arrangement, are named as defendants.
The Plaintiffs are represented by Silverstein and Rebecca T. Wallace of the ACLU of Colorado; Ayesha N. Khan and Gregory M. Lipper of Americans United for Separation of Church and State; Weaver and Daniel Mach of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief; and Matthew J. Douglas, Timothy R. Macdonald, Michelle K. Albert, Paul Alexander, and George Langendorf of Arnold & Porter LLP, cooperating counsel.
Monday, June 20, 2011
NOW Declares Emergency Rally for Women in the 2012 Budget Outside Senator Rubio's Tampa Office Friday
This action is an urgent appeal to stop "slash-onomics" as Congress prepares to vote on the 2012 federal budget. The version passed in the House of Representatives would dismantle the economic safety net for women by block-granting Medicaid, privatizing Medicare, and fast-tracking cuts to Social Security. In addition, that budget would take away billions from programs that disproportionately serve and employ women, including Head Start and Pell Grants.
Sen. Rubio stands as a prominent symbol of radical right-wing "Tea Party" politics, which aim to lower taxes on the wealthiest while waging a war on women. He also represents a faction that oddly forgets what home rule means when it comes to the District of Columbia. This budget proposes to once again overrule D.C.'s local decision-making authority to direct its own dollars toward providing abortion care for women who would not receive health care without government assistance. By calling on Congress to stay out of D.C., the NOW rally will stand in solidarity with a demonstration organized by national civil rights leaders, which takes place the following day outside the White House.
Who: NOW national officers, leaders and activists from across the country
What: Emergency Rally for Women in the 2012 Budget
When: Friday, June 24, 10:00 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.
Where: Sidewalk outside of Senator Rubio's Tampa Office (3802 Spectrum Blvd.)
Democratic Events this Week in South Carolina
Please visit http://www.scdp.org/ for a complete listing of Democratic events throughout South Carolina.
Join the Charleston Dems for the first Peninsula Democrats organizational meeting on Wednesday, June 22, 6:30 PM at the Charleston Law School, Sol Blatt Jr Library, Room 101B, 81 Mary St, Charleston. If you are interested in helping organize the Peninsula, especially helping in your own precinct, please join us. All are invited and welcome.
The West Side Democrats will meet Thursday, June 23, 5:30 PM at the Horry County Democratic Party Headquarters, 900 4th Ave, Conway. All are invited and welcome.
The Indian Land Democratic Club will meet Thursday, June 23, 7 PM at the Del Webb Library, 7641 Charlotte Hwy, Indian Land, SC. Guest speaker is Attorney Ross Shealy, and he will discuss money in politics.
Capitol Consulting Strategies, a non partisan political consulting and government relations firm, is hosting a legislative forum on Thursday, June 23, 6 PM at the Cecil Tillis Center, 2111 Simpkins Ln, Columbia. Event is free and the panel topic will be a summary and analysis of the current legislative session in the General Assembly. For more information contact info@mycapitolconsulting.com
The Sumter County Democrats will hold its monthly breakfast Saturday, June 25, 9 AM at Golden Corral, 2385 Walmart Blvd, Sumter. Guest Speaker will be Will Maxey, 3rd Vice Chair of the South Carolina Democratic Party. All are welcome.
The York County Democratic Women's Council will hold its inaugural meeting on Saturday, June 25, 10 AM at Golden Corral, 1031 Anderson Rd N, Rock Hill. Guest Speakers include Cherie Mabrey, President of South Carolina Democratic Women's Council; Kayla Mallett, Organizing for America; and Amanda Loveday, South Carolina Democratic Party. Get involved from the beginning. All invited and welcome.
The Berkeley Democrats host Family Fun Day Sat, June 25, 11 AM at Wassamassaw Park, Summerville. Event will conclude at 3 PM. Food and games available for all ages. All invited and welcome.
The McCormick County Democratic Party hosts its Annual Fish Fry on Saturday, June 25, 12 PM at Plum Branch Yacht Club, Fish Village Rd, Plumb Branch. Tickets are $10. the beach will be open for swimming and the changing and shower facilities will be available. So bring your suits and cool off!
Directions are easy: Take SC 28 to Plum Branch and turn on Fishing Village Road. (It will be a left turn if you are coming form the south (Augusta) and a right turn if coming form the north (McCormick). It is about four miles and the road ends at the Yacht Club.
To have your Democratic events listed next week, send the information to info@scdp.org.
Join the Charleston Dems for the first Peninsula Democrats organizational meeting on Wednesday, June 22, 6:30 PM at the Charleston Law School, Sol Blatt Jr Library, Room 101B, 81 Mary St, Charleston. If you are interested in helping organize the Peninsula, especially helping in your own precinct, please join us. All are invited and welcome.
The West Side Democrats will meet Thursday, June 23, 5:30 PM at the Horry County Democratic Party Headquarters, 900 4th Ave, Conway. All are invited and welcome.
The Indian Land Democratic Club will meet Thursday, June 23, 7 PM at the Del Webb Library, 7641 Charlotte Hwy, Indian Land, SC. Guest speaker is Attorney Ross Shealy, and he will discuss money in politics.
Capitol Consulting Strategies, a non partisan political consulting and government relations firm, is hosting a legislative forum on Thursday, June 23, 6 PM at the Cecil Tillis Center, 2111 Simpkins Ln, Columbia. Event is free and the panel topic will be a summary and analysis of the current legislative session in the General Assembly. For more information contact info@mycapitolconsulting.com
The Sumter County Democrats will hold its monthly breakfast Saturday, June 25, 9 AM at Golden Corral, 2385 Walmart Blvd, Sumter. Guest Speaker will be Will Maxey, 3rd Vice Chair of the South Carolina Democratic Party. All are welcome.
The York County Democratic Women's Council will hold its inaugural meeting on Saturday, June 25, 10 AM at Golden Corral, 1031 Anderson Rd N, Rock Hill. Guest Speakers include Cherie Mabrey, President of South Carolina Democratic Women's Council; Kayla Mallett, Organizing for America; and Amanda Loveday, South Carolina Democratic Party. Get involved from the beginning. All invited and welcome.
The Berkeley Democrats host Family Fun Day Sat, June 25, 11 AM at Wassamassaw Park, Summerville. Event will conclude at 3 PM. Food and games available for all ages. All invited and welcome.
The McCormick County Democratic Party hosts its Annual Fish Fry on Saturday, June 25, 12 PM at Plum Branch Yacht Club, Fish Village Rd, Plumb Branch. Tickets are $10. the beach will be open for swimming and the changing and shower facilities will be available. So bring your suits and cool off!
Directions are easy: Take SC 28 to Plum Branch and turn on Fishing Village Road. (It will be a left turn if you are coming form the south (Augusta) and a right turn if coming form the north (McCormick). It is about four miles and the road ends at the Yacht Club.
To have your Democratic events listed next week, send the information to info@scdp.org.
MegaVote: SC 1st, 6/20/2011
In this MegaVote for South Carolina's 1st Congressional District: Recent Congressional Votes
Upcoming Congressional Bills
| |
| Recent Senate Votes | |
| Ethanol subsidies amendment - Vote Agreed to (73-27) During work on the Economic Development Administration bill, the Senate adopted this amendment to eliminate a tax credit refiners receive for adding ethanol to gasoline and a tariff on imported ethanol. Sen. Lindsey Graham voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Sen. Jim DeMint voted YES......send e-mail or see bio | |
| Recent House Votes | |
| Military Construction-Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY2012 - Vote Passed (411-5, 16 Not Voting) The House passed this $143.9 billion bill that would fund the Veterans Affairs Department and the Defense Department’s construction activities for the upcoming fiscal year. The bill marks a two percent increase over the current year’s level. The Senate has not yet begun work on its version of the bill. Rep. Tim Scott voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Agriculture Appropriations, FY2012 - Vote Passed (217-203, 12 Not Voting) The House passed this bill that would provide $125.5 billion in the upcoming fiscal year for the Agriculture Department. The bill would cut discretionary spending by thirteen percent over the current amount and increase mandatory spending by three percent. The Senate has not yet begun work on its version of the bill. Rep. Tim Scott voted YES......send e-mail or see bio | |
| Upcoming Votes | |
| Nomination of Leon E. Panetta to be Defense Secretary - The Senate has a Tuesday vote scheduled on the nomination of Leon Panetta, the current CIA Director, to be the new Defense Secretary. Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 - S.679 This bill would reduce the number of executive branch appointments that require Senate confirmation. Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011 - S.782 The Senate is scheduled to work on this bill that would authorize $500 million annually over the next 5 years for the Economic Development Administration. Defense Appropriations - H.R.2219 The House is scheduled to work on this bill that would provide the Defense Department with $648.7 billion for the 2012 fiscal year. America Invents Act - H.R.1249 The House may also take up this bill that would overhaul the U.S. patent system. | |
Supreme Court to Women of Wal-Mart: You're on Your Own
Today, a Supreme Court majority ruled against women by siding with the country's largest employment discriminator, saying Wal-Mart, essentially, is too big to sue. The brave women, led by Betty Dukes, who stood up to Wal-Mart at great personal sacrifice, are told simply they're on their own.
"With this decision, the Supreme Court has assisted Wal-Mart in its efforts to systematically dole out promotions and pay raises on the basis of sex. The law calls that illegal discrimination, but this Court has turned its back on the more than million women who only sought simple justice," said NOW President Terry O'Neill. "The women of Wal-Mart deserve respect and fair treatment, and we will continue to stand up for their rights."
In 2002, NOW declared Wal-Mart a "Merchant of Shame" as part of its Women-Friendly Workplace Campaign. NOW chapters have led countless community demonstrations at Wal-Mart stores around the country to educate shoppers about Wal-Mart's exploitation of its women employees.
Today, NOW demands an immediate legislative response to help the women of Wal-Mart. We call on Congress to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would provide more effective remedies to victims of sex-based wage discrimination. This bill passed in the House in January 2009, but ultimately was defeated in the Senate.
"The gap between women's and men's pay is still sizeable, which is why it's so important to get this legislation passed," stated O'Neill. "We will continue supporting the efforts of Senators Mikulski, Cantwell, Gillibrand, Klobuchar, Stabenow and others to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act and hold accountable those who stand in the way of this sensible remedial bill."
A legislative remedy is only part of the solution, however. NOW also calls on Wal-Mart to end its unconscionable resistance to employees' efforts to form unions and bargain collectively over pay, benefits and other conditions of employment. Research demonstrates that unionized women workers earn better wages and have better benefits than their non-union counterparts. In fact, women in unions earn 11.2 percent more or $2.00 more per hour than non-union women workers. And the gender wage gap is smaller in unionized workplaces.
"The benefits of being unionized are significant," said O'Neill. "Women workers can gain a voice through a union that they could never have individually, ultimately making Wal-Mart a better place to work for everyone."
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Stop Dragging Feet on Georgetown Port
It seems studies rather than immediate action are the flavor of the month in South Carolina. That's quite sad, in my opinion. The Georgetown port never needed a study to begin. It needs actual dredging work.
Bullshit. That focus "they" mention may be for anything but industry. State Rep. Kevin Ryan let the cat out of the bag on The Georgetown Times' Facebook page with a comment last month. I believe they couldn't care less about industry.
In 2008, there was mention of a "major industrial announcement" potentially being made. I believe, though, certain people voiced their displeasure with jobs coming to the area that didn't favor them, a minority of business owners, and they put financial and/or political pressure on Brown. Now, they have Timmy - who really won't make waves in regards to getting jobs for poor to middle class people.
I will supply a study completed in 2010 to get people caught up. Stop dragging your feet and start bringing in the equipment to dredge.
Genesis Consulting of Columbia has been hired by the county through a grant to come up with a list of industries and companies that could, and should, have operations in Georgetown County, as well as a list of the "best uses" for the Port of Georgetown and how those uses could be supplemented by improvements, including dredging.
Target industry lists have been done before and the port has been studied in almost every way, but Genesis people say they have a more specific and detailed focus.
Bullshit. That focus "they" mention may be for anything but industry. State Rep. Kevin Ryan let the cat out of the bag on The Georgetown Times' Facebook page with a comment last month. I believe they couldn't care less about industry.
In 2008, there was mention of a "major industrial announcement" potentially being made. I believe, though, certain people voiced their displeasure with jobs coming to the area that didn't favor them, a minority of business owners, and they put financial and/or political pressure on Brown. Now, they have Timmy - who really won't make waves in regards to getting jobs for poor to middle class people.
I will supply a study completed in 2010 to get people caught up. Stop dragging your feet and start bringing in the equipment to dredge.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
The South Carolina Voters Association's Position on the New Voter ID Law
"An unjust law is no law at all." - Martin Luther King Jr.
On May 18, 2011, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley signed into law this nation's most disenfranchising voting law since the Jim Crow era Poll Taxes and Literacy Tests. This law was specifically designed to circumvent the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by establishing road blocks and adding additional layers of bureaucratic red tape to the voting process. Its sole intent is to disenfranchise specific demographics that historically vote Democratic.
The SC Election Commission found that 178,175 South Carolinians have voter registration cards but no state issued ID's. If this were the sole problem, it could be addressed through a variety of measures. But, instead of ensuring the integrity of the voting process, this law unfortunately is meant to add stringent qualifications and unnecessary burdens that persons wanting to vote must first maneuver around. This law will potentially create a number of minuscule reasons why one could be denied the issuance of a state ID; thereby making them ineligible to qualify for a voter registration card.
The South Carolina Voters Association sees this law as regressive and unconstitutional. Furthermore, research has shown no documented case of voter fraud in the state of South Carolina. Therefore, this law seeks to solve a problem that does not exist.
We want every citizen to know, whether they stand with us in solidarity or against us in opposition, that we shall oppose this law at every level of government, by any means available, through any course of action; bare any cross, suffer any adversity, accept any consequence, confront any opposition, aide any ally or join any battle to protect the voting rights of all South Carolinians.
Balanced Budget Amendments And Spending Caps: What Do They Really Mean For Children, The Middle Class, And Our Nation’s Future?
As debates continue in Congress around balanced budget amendments and spending caps, missing from much of the conversation is the impact these proposals would have on the most vulnerable in our nation. Proposals are now on the table to cap federal spending, require a balanced budget, and mandate the approval of “super-majorities” in both the House and Senate to override caps or raise taxes to meet them. These proposals would have devastating consequences for children, working families, the elderly, and others with the greatest needs.
Simply put, these plans would result in the largest cuts in federal spending in modern history. Education programs, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other programs that meet crucial national needs would be decimated. Our fragile economy would be sent into a tailspin and the investments necessary to continue economic recovery would be impossible. The middle class continues to struggle to find work, pay more for health care, and worry about their children’s education and future. Seniors continue to worry about their retirement security. A balanced budget amendment or spending caps would destroy the programs intended to help those struggling, leaving them stranded.
Take Action Today: As educators, NEA members have a unique perspective on the importance of investing in education and protecting the most vulnerable in our nation. The stories you can share with policymakers about the impact of proposed spending cuts on your students, colleagues, and communities can be very powerful. Tell Congress to oppose balanced budget amendments and spending caps!
Simply put, these plans would result in the largest cuts in federal spending in modern history. Education programs, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other programs that meet crucial national needs would be decimated. Our fragile economy would be sent into a tailspin and the investments necessary to continue economic recovery would be impossible. The middle class continues to struggle to find work, pay more for health care, and worry about their children’s education and future. Seniors continue to worry about their retirement security. A balanced budget amendment or spending caps would destroy the programs intended to help those struggling, leaving them stranded.
Take Action Today: As educators, NEA members have a unique perspective on the importance of investing in education and protecting the most vulnerable in our nation. The stories you can share with policymakers about the impact of proposed spending cuts on your students, colleagues, and communities can be very powerful. Tell Congress to oppose balanced budget amendments and spending caps!
Walmart Associates gather at corporate HQ for Respect
Nearly one hundred Walmart Associates from across the country travelled to Walmart corporate headquarters.
They presented a declaration to Walmart executives, asking that the company respect their right to speak up about problems they face in their stores, improve their wages and working conditions, and treat all employees with respect.
View photos and a recap of the event at OUR Walmart’s website by clicking here.
The effort was an action taken by a new Associate-led group, the Organization United for Respect at Walmart (OUR Walmart), which is seeking to improve the lives and working conditions of Walmart Associates in stores across the country.
The group is the largest ever of its type seeking to improve conditions at Walmart, and broke in the news this past Wednesday in a story by the New York Times.
If you’re a Walmart Associate who is interested in this effort, learn more about the Organization United for Respect at Walmart by clicking here.
Since 2005, we at Walmart Watch have sought to hold Walmart fully accountable for its impact on communities, the American workforce, the retail sector, the environment and our nation’s economy.
As the world’s retail industry leader, Walmart sets standards for wages, benefits and beyond. This movement of Walmart Associates has the potential for making a real difference in the lives of fellow employees – and because of Walmart’s position as a retail leader, their actions will have consequences that reach far beyond their stores.
A petition for supporters of these Associates is circulating at the Making Change at Walmart site. Click here to sign the petition.
Sincerely,
Walmart Watch
P.S. Follow this story and more by becoming a Fan of Walmart Watch’s Facebook page or by following us on Twitter @WMTWatch.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Texas House Votes for Attack on Texas Classrooms, 74 to 59
The legislature is “failing to support students, failing to respect teachers, and failing to listen to parents.” That was the verdict pronounced on the current legislature by Rep. Sylvester Turner, Democrat of Houston, after Thursday’s House vote to approve SB 8, a bill that undermines state salary and contract safeguards for teachers and invites school districts to enlarge class sizes.
It’s hard to disagree with Rep. Turner’s assessment, offered at a press conference well attended by members of our Education Austin affiliate such as Montserrat Garibay. Garibay, a National Board Certified bilingual teacher, spoke out against the pay cuts that would be authorized by SB 8 and also denounced the legislature’s complete elimination of funding for full-day pre-kindergarten in the budget bill passed May 29.
Texas AFT President Linda Bridges observed: “Senate Bill 8, passed by the Texas House today under the banner of ‘flexibility’ for school districts, really is not about needed flexibility at all. SB 8 is about balancing the budget on the backs of students and educators. In effect, this bill says to school districts: ‘The Texas legislature will not keep its promise to provide adequate funding for you to educate the state’s schoolchildren, but you are welcome to economize at the expense of your students and their teachers.’”
Main features of the bill include authority for districts to impose unpaid furloughs of up to six days (costing the average teacher up to $1,560), to cut teacher pay by other means as well, and to lower procedural safeguards for teachers faced with termination in the middle of their contract’s term, based on a district’s declared “financial exigency.”
Ironically, any attempt to apply the bill’s provisions degrading contract rights to existing contracts will run afoul of well-established legal rules against retroactively altering the terms of an established contract. So this bill touted as one to save districts time and money in terminating teachers’ contracts actually is likely to foment costly litigation that districts will lose.
Clearly, though, for the House majority the goal was not practical but ideological. One case in point: An amendment by Rep. Myra Crownover, Republican of Lake Dallas, says that dues-based employee organizations like Texas AFT cannot receive dues through a school district’s payroll-deduction mechanism unless they annually send a written notice to their dues-payers of the amount of dues deducted. This amendment has no practical value; dues-payers already receive ample notice of the amount of dues collected through voluntary deductions. As Texas AFL-CIO communications director Ed Sills put the matter today: “Workers who join a union and voluntarily ask for dues to be deducted from their paychecks know how much is deducted; the information is on one’s pay stub each pay period. This is a nuisance idea at best….” In fact, it is nothing but an expression of ideological hostility to teachers and their organizations, which dare to amplify teachers’ voices on matters of public policy—including lousy public policy like SB 8.
This bill now goes back to the Senate. The Senate can either accept House changes or name a conference committee to reconcile the ugly Senate bill with the uglier House version.
It’s hard to disagree with Rep. Turner’s assessment, offered at a press conference well attended by members of our Education Austin affiliate such as Montserrat Garibay. Garibay, a National Board Certified bilingual teacher, spoke out against the pay cuts that would be authorized by SB 8 and also denounced the legislature’s complete elimination of funding for full-day pre-kindergarten in the budget bill passed May 29.
Texas AFT President Linda Bridges observed: “Senate Bill 8, passed by the Texas House today under the banner of ‘flexibility’ for school districts, really is not about needed flexibility at all. SB 8 is about balancing the budget on the backs of students and educators. In effect, this bill says to school districts: ‘The Texas legislature will not keep its promise to provide adequate funding for you to educate the state’s schoolchildren, but you are welcome to economize at the expense of your students and their teachers.’”
Main features of the bill include authority for districts to impose unpaid furloughs of up to six days (costing the average teacher up to $1,560), to cut teacher pay by other means as well, and to lower procedural safeguards for teachers faced with termination in the middle of their contract’s term, based on a district’s declared “financial exigency.”
Ironically, any attempt to apply the bill’s provisions degrading contract rights to existing contracts will run afoul of well-established legal rules against retroactively altering the terms of an established contract. So this bill touted as one to save districts time and money in terminating teachers’ contracts actually is likely to foment costly litigation that districts will lose.
Clearly, though, for the House majority the goal was not practical but ideological. One case in point: An amendment by Rep. Myra Crownover, Republican of Lake Dallas, says that dues-based employee organizations like Texas AFT cannot receive dues through a school district’s payroll-deduction mechanism unless they annually send a written notice to their dues-payers of the amount of dues deducted. This amendment has no practical value; dues-payers already receive ample notice of the amount of dues collected through voluntary deductions. As Texas AFL-CIO communications director Ed Sills put the matter today: “Workers who join a union and voluntarily ask for dues to be deducted from their paychecks know how much is deducted; the information is on one’s pay stub each pay period. This is a nuisance idea at best….” In fact, it is nothing but an expression of ideological hostility to teachers and their organizations, which dare to amplify teachers’ voices on matters of public policy—including lousy public policy like SB 8.
This bill now goes back to the Senate. The Senate can either accept House changes or name a conference committee to reconcile the ugly Senate bill with the uglier House version.
Ryan Medicare Plan's Effect on Veterans – Spread the Word!
This plan will also punish veterans – harshly – and it’s important that you spread the word on how it will do so.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ABOUT THE RYAN/REPUBLICAN PLAN’S EFFECT ON VETERANS AND SPREAD THE WORD
Here are the facts:
- Millions of veterans over 65 rely on Medicare, Medicaid or private insurance for their health care. In fact, according to the last survey of veterans by the Department of Veterans’ affairs, 39.3 percent of veterans use Medicare, compared with 14 percent of the general population.
- Many of these veterans are relying on Medicare as their sole health care provider. The Ryan plan would have an immediate impact on these veterans, forcing those falling into the “donut hole” with high-cost prescription drug costs to pay more for their medications in addition to paying more for preventative health services.
- Veterans who rely on Medicaid would not escape cuts either. The Republican plan could slash $1.4 trillion in health benefits over the next ten years. Forty-four states are already facing significant budget shortfall in Fiscal Year 2012, and the cuts could force the state to either ration health care benefits for veterans across the country, restrict eligibility rules and leave thousands uninsured, including veterans, or raise taxes to cover the shortfall.
- Finally, many veterans rely on private insurance, mostly through their employer. Because Republicans want to repeal the recent health insurance law, these veterans will no longer have guaranteed access to health insurance regardless of pre-existing conditions and may see annual or lifetime caps on coverage under the Republican budget.
In short, Republicans and Paul Ryan will strip away care for our veterans, in the name of budget cutting. These proposals are draconian, cruel, and unfair to those men and women who put their lives on the line for this country. But, unless we spread the word about how severely the Ryan/Republican plan will hurt veterans, most Americans won’t ever know.
SO, CLICK HERE TO START SPREADING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE RYAN/REPUBLICAN PLAN
Thanks for your support.
Sincerely,
Ashwin Madia
Iraq War Veteran
Interim Chairman, VoteVets.org
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Georgetown City Council Must Be Satisfying People
The Georgetown City Council must be satisfying people. I mean, look at the primary. There was a chance to replace incumbents. No change, There was a chance to send a message. Denied. There was a chance to capitalize on the negative sentiments taking place. Not happening.
Wonder why. I believe people are afraid to run under anything except Democratic given the city makeup. I suppose any potential candidate sees their best effort (or chance) takes place as a petition candidate. We'll see.
Even with that, there's not much to choose from. From what I gather, a lot of talk takes place, but no one walks it. So, I suggest giving credit to those who serve because they do so with intent of making the city better. Disagree? Then challenge them on the ballot. That's where it counts. Balls up and run under a label - party politics applies until changed - and accept the consequences for a win or loss.
From what I see now, it looks as if we may be stuck with the same on council. If so, then people ought to pay even more attention and fully decide whether they ought to walk in the shoes the incumbents wear and challenge for a spot.
Until then, it looks like Georgetown City Council satisfies.
Wonder why. I believe people are afraid to run under anything except Democratic given the city makeup. I suppose any potential candidate sees their best effort (or chance) takes place as a petition candidate. We'll see.
Even with that, there's not much to choose from. From what I gather, a lot of talk takes place, but no one walks it. So, I suggest giving credit to those who serve because they do so with intent of making the city better. Disagree? Then challenge them on the ballot. That's where it counts. Balls up and run under a label - party politics applies until changed - and accept the consequences for a win or loss.
From what I see now, it looks as if we may be stuck with the same on council. If so, then people ought to pay even more attention and fully decide whether they ought to walk in the shoes the incumbents wear and challenge for a spot.
Until then, it looks like Georgetown City Council satisfies.
Jim DeMint Now Likes Obama, Wants His Help?
You know, for a jerk like Jim DeMint you'd think he'd realize how he looks now.
By wanting President Obama to interfere in a legal battle, he is basically telling people he now likes Obama and wants his help. Imagine that. Now that the National Labor Relations Board is doing its job, Republicans like Tim Scott and Jim DeMint can't stand it.
So, DeMint has to politic - instead of create jobs. Yeah, doing this really helps the people of South Carolina, Jimmy.
But who cares, right? Not many people are going to stand up to these clowns publicly. That's what these political jerks count on. You all being submissive. So, remember when this state becomes a slum. It wasn't Democrats who caused it. Republicans lead and continue to lead the charge into the dark here.
The corporate media continues to publish their spin of the issue by allowing Republicans to connect the state's right-to-work law to it. People who know the truth realize it's bull. But you, the reader, have to either catch that on your own or just go with the flow because the media doesn't provide any facts in that matter.
And Jimmy DeMint knows it. So, that is why the Waterloo Wonderboy gets away with a free pass in our media, our state and by its people.
By wanting President Obama to interfere in a legal battle, he is basically telling people he now likes Obama and wants his help. Imagine that. Now that the National Labor Relations Board is doing its job, Republicans like Tim Scott and Jim DeMint can't stand it.
So, DeMint has to politic - instead of create jobs. Yeah, doing this really helps the people of South Carolina, Jimmy.
But who cares, right? Not many people are going to stand up to these clowns publicly. That's what these political jerks count on. You all being submissive. So, remember when this state becomes a slum. It wasn't Democrats who caused it. Republicans lead and continue to lead the charge into the dark here.
The corporate media continues to publish their spin of the issue by allowing Republicans to connect the state's right-to-work law to it. People who know the truth realize it's bull. But you, the reader, have to either catch that on your own or just go with the flow because the media doesn't provide any facts in that matter.
And Jimmy DeMint knows it. So, that is why the Waterloo Wonderboy gets away with a free pass in our media, our state and by its people.
Where's The Spine, Dems?
South Carolina will remain under Red State Rule.
And it will continue until Democratic volunteers and participants realize the consultants looking for a check are just doing that. Even more, a couple people can't do it all. It has to be a joint effort and it has to include the masses. And yes, you have to stand behind your real name, be steadfast and stay out in public - 24/7, not just during political season.
Instead of getting out a vote, South Carolina Dems need to put in a spine. Being chummy with the people you are trying to beat is a behavior that may work for a few of you, but not for the thousands who support Democratic principles. You see, those people have families to tend to after Republicans whip our ass. They don't go around shopping resumes for the next job. They have to remain in the ruin afterward. That is what I fight against. I want to change the spectrum in this state where the positive is on Democratic principles.
I know where I stand in this state. I am on the losing side. However, I do not chum it up as if this is a game, hoping for scraps. I continue to fight while a majority of others do not echo my sentiments because they do not want to jeopardize their hiring chances. Well, the people they court for votes are not provided those opportunities.
To be honest, a lot of people on my side hate for me to speak this truth. They don't like their egos hurt. Well, if holding on an ego with a losing legacy means something, I pretty much can't say anything else. I can laugh, though.
Behaviors have to change. Operating procedures need to improve. And this whole notion of being so damn friendly with one another is bullshit. Look, laws are made with the interests of the people who sent lawmakers there, not because you have a talk show or a dinner with someone from the opposing side. And the best way to protect your vested interest? You win elections.
And, um, Dems lose here.
So, spine up. Grow that backbone and fight. Otherwise, the people fought for will remain struggling while the major party politicos eat at the trough - together.
And it will continue until Democratic volunteers and participants realize the consultants looking for a check are just doing that. Even more, a couple people can't do it all. It has to be a joint effort and it has to include the masses. And yes, you have to stand behind your real name, be steadfast and stay out in public - 24/7, not just during political season.
Instead of getting out a vote, South Carolina Dems need to put in a spine. Being chummy with the people you are trying to beat is a behavior that may work for a few of you, but not for the thousands who support Democratic principles. You see, those people have families to tend to after Republicans whip our ass. They don't go around shopping resumes for the next job. They have to remain in the ruin afterward. That is what I fight against. I want to change the spectrum in this state where the positive is on Democratic principles.
I know where I stand in this state. I am on the losing side. However, I do not chum it up as if this is a game, hoping for scraps. I continue to fight while a majority of others do not echo my sentiments because they do not want to jeopardize their hiring chances. Well, the people they court for votes are not provided those opportunities.
To be honest, a lot of people on my side hate for me to speak this truth. They don't like their egos hurt. Well, if holding on an ego with a losing legacy means something, I pretty much can't say anything else. I can laugh, though.
Behaviors have to change. Operating procedures need to improve. And this whole notion of being so damn friendly with one another is bullshit. Look, laws are made with the interests of the people who sent lawmakers there, not because you have a talk show or a dinner with someone from the opposing side. And the best way to protect your vested interest? You win elections.
And, um, Dems lose here.
So, spine up. Grow that backbone and fight. Otherwise, the people fought for will remain struggling while the major party politicos eat at the trough - together.
Radical Budget Proposals Will Harm Economy and Hurt Women & Families
 | After taking action, please support our work! |
As negotiations to pass the 2012 budget proceed, even more radical proposals are being advanced in the name of forcing harsh austerity measures on an already fragile economy. In addition to deep funding cuts to domestic programs that disproportionately serve and employ women, extremists in the House are also proposing a number of measures that would permanently shrink federal budgets. These radical proposals would throw hundreds of thousands out of work (jobs mostly held by women) and create long-term economic problems for our nation.
Conservative lawmakers are withholding their votes to increase the debt ceiling (which needs to be done in the next few weeks) in exchange for passage of their extreme and dangerous proposals. Your House member needs to hear from you!
Please tell your House member that:
1) Funding for vital social programs that help women and their families must be protected;
2) Such measures as the balanced-budget amendment, across-the-board spending caps, and reduction in the cost-of-living allowance will be harmful to the economy and to millions of working women and their families.
Take Action NOW!
BACKGROUND:
As budget negotiations unfold and the debt ceiling vote looms, the economic well-being of women hangs in the balance. Although the Senate defeated the House Budget (H. Con. Res. 34) for the 2012 fiscal year, the battle is far from over. Conservatives in the House are now proposing measures that are even more harmful than their failed 2012 budget draft. In addition to legislation that would fast-track Social Security benefit cuts, convert Medicare to a private voucher system and make deep cuts in Medicaid, they are hoping to force through long-term plans to cut federal expenditures to the bone through spending caps and a radical balanced-budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Balanced-Budget Amendment
The Hatch-Lee balanced-budget amendment is absolutely not the answer, and it is sure to cause great damage to the economy over the long-term. The measure (S.J. Res. 10, introduced in the House as H.J. Res. 56) would limit annual spending to 18 percent of the previous year's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The House Republican majority is pushing hard for it or a similar version, even though many economists have said it would create havoc with the economy.
Soon to be reported out of the House Judiciary Committee and voted on in July, the proposal requires a two-thirds vote for passage, which could be accomplished with only 45 Democrats joining with all Republican members to vote in favor. The amendment language requires that a super-majority vote of two-thirds of both the House and Senate -- which would be nearly impossible in practice -- would be needed to increase any taxes. This is the not-so-hidden agenda of congressional conservatives to virtually eliminate taxation of the rich -- even if that means cratering our economy and harming the well-being of the middle and lower classes.
Proposed Federal Caps
Several proposals have been suggested to adopt a spending cap on the federal budget; one would hold spending to 21.5 percent of GDP, or three percentage points lower than it is right now. This proposal is even more radical than the House-passed budget. It would cause catastrophic cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and all other domestic spending.
Chained CPI
Also being advocated by conservative lawmakers is the "chained consumer price index (CPI)," which would drastically reduce cost-of-living adjustments in Social Security benefits. The chained CPI is designed to restate consumer prices as if they are lower than they actually are. This is justified by some economists' claim that we can ignore an increase in the price of a product if a substitute product is available and hasn't gone up.
The chained CPI thus focuses on hypothetical possibilities about prices while ignoring the actual, real-life increases in prices that Social Security beneficiaries have to pay -- like rent, health care, medication, transportation, etc. As it is, the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for Social Security has not been updated for two years.
With Social Security checks averaging only $1,000 a month for women, how can we expect women to live on less? For many women, especially women of color and lifetime low-income earners, Social Security is their sole source of income for retirement.
The chained CPI is a cold-hearted recipe for pushing millions into poverty; this would disproportionately affect women, especially women of color, elderly women, lifetime low-income earners, and persons with disabilities. Along with the proposals to turn Medicare into a private voucher system and slash Medicaid, the chained CPI would all but dissolve the economic safety net, devastating current and future Social Security beneficiaries.
Dangerous Long-Term Consequences
The proposals being considered in the House are NOT realistic, cautious and well-formulated. They are reckless, anti-democratic and will have long-term consequences. Spending caps, deep cuts to vital social safety net programs, the chained CPI and a balanced-budget amendment to the constitution are all ill-advised. If adopted, these measures would devastate our government's ability to stabilize the economy and maintain a strong middle class while aiding lower-income families. They are radical right-wing, empower-the-rich and to-hell-with-everyone-else ideas about how to run this country -- and run it badly!
Infringement of Home Rule in the District of Columbia
In addition to proposing reprehensible outcomes for the entire country, the House budget also attempts to overrule the District of Columbia's local authority to fund abortion care for low-income women residents. NOW also condemns the attempt in this bill to overrule D.C.'s needle exchange program, which has been proven to reduce transmission of HIV/AIDS.
Take action NOW by sending a message to your House member.
Sources
» http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.
» http://www.
» http://www.nwlc.org/our-
» http://www.nwlc.org/resource/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Support I-73
