Allow the Global Supertanker to Fight Fires in Oregon
Wildfires in the state of Oregon are burning out of control. There are over 20 significant fires in the state that are affecting citizens both directly (loss of property/life) and indirectly (health issues due to smoke inhalation). The US Forest Service has access to what is possibly the most powerful wildfire fighting tool in existence; a 747 aircraft capable of dropping far more water/retardant than anything else available today. The US Forestry Service has refused to use this tool due to contract disputes, and their refusal is directly affecting residents in the state of Oregon. This petition is to demand the forest service re evaluate their position on the global supertanker, and utilize this powerful tool to help control the fire situation in the Western U.S., and encourage Governor Brown to work with the Forest Service to give our firefighters the tools they deserve when conditions allow! ***Global Super Tanker Info*** The 747 Super Tanker is capable of delivering 20,000 gallons of retardant anywhere in the United States within 2.5 hours of being called upon. Important dates: January 23, 2016: SuperTanker FAA Initial Flight Test Complete November 25, 2016: Supertanker Deployed to Isreal January 25, 2017: SuperTanker drops on first fire in Chile ***July 27, 2017: SuperTanker approved for flights by USFS*** ***August 27, 2017: SuperTanker activated to fight fire in California*** If you would like more info, please visit their website: http://globalsupertanker.com/b747-400-supertanker/
Ratify the Equal Rights Amendment
This is the year 2016. Isn’t it time women had equal rights in America? Will you join me by signing a petition compelling your lawmakers to vote to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment? “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The Equal Rights Amendment, first introduced in 1923 by Alice Paul, is an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that affirms that all citizens deserve equal rights under the law regardless of sex or gender. Seems self-evident, right? Do you think that women’s equal rights are guaranteed by our constitution? Sadly, they are not. The ERA never passed, leaving women’s rights up for interpretation. This imbalance has been demonstrated time and time again in the highest courts in the land, where women often lose even when clear bias is shown. Women’s rights are seemingly at the mercy of whoever is in office or on a judicial bench at any given time. Here is what one of our most influential Supreme Court justices said on the matter of sex discrimination: "Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't." —Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia While we in America may think that women are doing fine, the rest of the world does not. The United Nations has deemed the United States to be a country that does not adequately protect women’s human rights. The Equal Rights Amendment may seem unnecessary to some, but the truth is American women do not have explicit rights under The Constitution. There are dozens of areas where a lack of equal rights negatively affects women and the families they support. Here are just a few: • America is the only nation in the world with a rising maternal mortality rate. • 10,000 abused women are turned away from shelters daily, a total of 3.65 million denied requests per year. When looking specifically at the gender pay gap: There is a direct correlation between underpaying mothers and child hunger. It is estimated that half of the 33 million women and children living in poverty in the United States would not be if women were paid their full dollar. Is it any wonder that 1 in 5 children in America go hungry? Seventy-five percent of all African American children are being raised by full time working single mothers who are paid .60 cents on the dollar. Latinas earn .55 cents on the dollar, and white women make .78 cents compared to their white male counterparts. Our transgender sisters are faring even worse. They are four times as likely to have a household income under $10,000 and twice as likely to be unemployed. Over the course of her working life, an American woman will lose between $400,000 and two million dollars due to wage discrimination. The Equal Rights Amendment would provide an express constitutional basis to challenge sex-based discrimination. It would also ensure that laws and government actions that treat women differently are reviewed by the courts with the strictest of standards. With the upcoming 2016 election we need to intensify the conversation around women's issues and compel our lawmakers to protect the basic civil and human rights of American women by passing the ERA. It is time that we finally make this happen for ourselves, our daughters, and for the future of our nation. If even Supreme Court justices don’t believe the Constitution protects women from discrimination, let’s pass an amendment that will. Please join me along with Kamala Lopez, the director of the upcoming documentary “Equal Means Equal,” the ERA Coalition, and Noreen Farrell of Equal Rights Advocates, to sign this petition for the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment #EqualMeansEqual —Patricia Arquette
Outlaw hog vs. dog hunting/fighting in the wild
Goal: To outlaw the cruel and inhumane practice of using dogs to hunt wild boar in Florida, as well as in the 31 others states it's currently legal. Florida (as well as other states) has a wild boar problem. Hogs are numerous, omnivorous and have no natural predators, making them one of the largest nuisance pests in the state. There are many humane options for dealing with the pigs, which do not need to involve brutally killing the pigs or putting domesticated dogs in harm’s way. However, despite the existence of alternatives, Florida and other states have exempted the use of "bait-dogs" in boar hunting. This practice is incredibly dangerous and very inhumane for the dogs and boars involved. Each of the 32 states that allow this practice laws differ, but Florida animal cruelty statutes states: FLORIDA ANIMALS: CRUELTY; SALES; ANIMAL ENTERPRISE PROTECTION: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0828/Sections/0828.122.html 828.122 Fighting or baiting animals; offenses; penalties.—(1) This act may be cited as “The Animal Fighting Act.”(2) As used in this section, the term:(a) “Animal fighting” means fighting between roosters or other birds or between dogs, bears, or other animals.(b) “Baiting” means to attack with violence, to provoke, or to harass an animal with one or more animals for the purpose of training an animal for, or to cause an animal to engage in, fights with or among other animals. In addition, “baiting” means the use of live animals in the training of racing greyhounds.(c) “Person” means every natural person, firm, copartnership, association, or corporation.(3) Any person who knowingly commits any of the following acts commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084:Baiting, breeding, training, transporting, selling, owning, possessing, or using any wild or domestic animal for the purpose of animal fighting or baiting; (9) This section shall not apply to:.....(e) Any person using dogs to hunt wild hogs or to retrieve domestic hogs pursuant to customary hunting or agricultural practices." The exception (e) makes NO logical sense, because dogs are trained to "hunt" by chasing, cornering, attacking and fighting. So, why is it illegal to cause a dog to fight another dog, or a pig in an enclosure, but it is legal to use dogs to chase and viciously attack pigs while being trained and in the wild? Boar hunting with dogs is exactly what it sounds like: dogs trained to track and attack. They are taken out into the country, or wherever wild hogs are plentiful, and set loose to sniff out hogs. Once a hog is found the dogs will chase it down, corner, bay and attack it, usually leaving it badly injured, but normally still alive. Hunters (when they catch up) will kill the pig, usually by "sticking," which is a prolonged death vs. the use of a proper gun. Wild hogs are incredibly difficult to kill and will put up a fight until the end. Many dogs involved are wounded by tusks, bitten, trampled and sometimes killed. This is basically animal fighting, in the wild. Putting dogs in such a dangerous situation is inhumane and should not be legal. PETITION LETTER: Wild boars are a major problem in Florida and in other states. The species has no natural predators, is omnivorous and repopulates very quickly: it is because of these traits that wild boars are a force hard to reckon with. There are many control methods used, some of them very inhumane. Currently it is legal for dogs to be used in wild hog hunting: this is extremely dangerous for the dogs involved and leads to inappropriate practices elsewhere. Dogs involved in hunting are likely to be seriously injured by the hogs. Dogs get trampled, bitten, pierced by tusks and may be infected with diseases that pigs carry. The hogs are frightened, outnumbered and suffer a painful death. I urge you to propose a ban on hunting wild pigs with dogs in order to put a stop to these inappropriate behaviors. Please consider other methods of wild pig population control, such as designating land for hogs to be displaced to, and controlling breeding of the species. Allowing dogs to hunt them is inhumane and unnecessary. Sincerely, [Your Name Here]
PLEASE Help the fight to get Christopher and Hunter back to their parents!
Imagine having your newborn baby taken away from you because of a falsely reported phone call to Child Protective Services and what that would feel like. And now imagine that they will not give your child back to you, despite years of jumping through hoops to prove that you are a worthy parent, with no evidence to the contrary. As a mother of two children, I can’t imagine a more terrifying world to live in...and yet, I’ve seen it happen to someone else. I’m here to share that story with you. Before going into the story, it seems fair to briefly tell you about who I am. Besides being a mother of two wonderful grown children, I am a doctoral student with an M.S. NDR (negotiation and dispute resolution), a B.S. in social science/psychology and an associate degree in criminal justice. I have over 20 years of volunteering in non-profit organizations and currently, I work as a Professional Mediator and Life Coach (www.aktionnow.com) I only share this because it helps to know that my education level and field of study qualify me to make these assessments and hopefully brings credibility to the story. I have been volunteering my time with a family as their life coach/mentor. I met them in May 2016 when I was volunteering at the Department of Human Services (DHS) Child Protective Services (CPS) in Bend, Oregon. My position was to monitor parent visitations for families that had their children in the State of Oregon’s custody. I met Amy and Eric when I was the case worker required to observe them during home visits with their nearly 3-year-old son, Christopher, every Friday. Each visit was for three hours, which provided a lot of interaction for me to observe and document. I quickly discovered that this family had no problem at all taking care of their son. They showed loving attention, were attentive to his needs, and at this point had been fighting faithfully in court for almost three years to prove to CPS that they were capable and loving parents. For those of you doing the math, yes, Christopher was removed from them when he was only days old. In my professional opinion, after multiple sessions observing Amy and Eric interact with their son for hours on end, I found no reason they should have had their child taken from them and placed in the State’s care. Any reasonably trained and educated CPS worker should have arrived at the same conclusion, as I documented in the session notes of every visit. The couple demonstrated competent parenting skills with Christopher, had no history of abuse or neglect, and expressed a deep desire to have Christopher returned to them to raise him along with the mother’s twin boys. I would also add that it was apparent from their body language and how they treated each other that the couple was in love, and while that is not a requirement to be a parent, it’s a big bonus for a child. So why was a newborn baby taken away from his mother and father? As the caseworker assigned to the family, I learned their story… Seven days after losing her own mother, Amy Fabbrini (the mother in this story) gave birth to Christopher at home. She was unaware that she was pregnant. Amy suffers from kidney issues (which she says is a genetic thing passed down from her family), causing intense pain at times. She had associated the symptoms of pregnancy with the disorder. After helping with a surprise delivery of his new baby boy, Eric (the father), immediately called 911 and had mother and baby brought to the hospital. Both were in shock of this and were understandably probably affected by this traumatic event. Amy had been living with her parents and her two twin boys after a divorce with the father of the twins. After losing her mother to Alzheimer’s and the surprise addition of a new child, Amy told her father of this event; to hear him tell her that she may not bring the infant back to his home. She was forced to make the decision to move with her twin boys in with her newborn child’s father, Eric. What happens next is what I believe to be a traumatic panic, her grieving father, dealing with the recent death of his wife and now losing the companionship of Amy and the twin boys, called CPS and falsely reported neglect, after he had already known about a falsely reported call from Eric's roommate (after an argument that they had). It sounds confusing but this is the mess the couple was in days after the infant had arrived, without having a chance to settle in as a new family, get adjusted to the idea of a new baby, or get the house ready for such an event, they were dealing with negativity - rather than excitement of a precious little baby boy. Sadly, CPS took infant Christopher, and he has been in foster care ever since. At the time that they took the infant, they also took Amy's twin boys and gave them to her ex-husband who had not really been involved with the boys much. Amy lost all three of her boys within a week after her loss of her mother to Alzheimer's. She was not given grievance counseling or condolences to this day from CPS. Additionally, the parents have complied with all of CPS’s requests from the beginning. There was no abuse. There was no neglect. There was no alcohol or drug use. CPS has simply claimed that they are “retarded” (yes, that was actually the term used by a CPS worker) and that they do not have the intelligence to raise a child. When I questioned this supervisor assigned to the case, he replied with derogatory remarks about the father and mother. I asked why the couple had not been given their child back. His reply shocked me. He said, “Eric is retarded, fat and lazy - he doesn't even brush his teeth. There is no way that I am allowing them to have Christopher.” The way that this supervisor spoke about the parents was anything but professional. It was then that I realized that this couple had been up against a powerful agency that seemed to have little or no accountability. After I had spent almost three months observing this family and reporting weekly on my observations, we learned that none of the reports I had submitted to CPS were given to the court or the attorneys representing each parent. Eric continually asked his attorney to get copies of the reports that I had submitted. After no reports were produced by CPS, Eric’s attorney asked me if I would be willing to testify in court regarding my observations of the visits. I agreed. While on vacation in California, I testified telephonically in court on behalf of Eric and Amy to report my observations that were in the reports which could not be obtained from CPS by either attorney. I reported the interactions that I observed between Eric, Amy and their son, Christopher. I told the judge that I did not understand why CPS had not returned this now almost 3-year-old child back to his parents. Just a few days after I testified in court, I was notified from CPS that they “no longer needed my volunteer help” because they “had recently hired someone for the position.” I was asked to come in and return my key to the building along with all equipment that CPS had given me to use while I was in an observational role. When I got back from my vacation, I met with the supervisor and turned everything in. During that meeting, I asked for clarification as to why I was being released [just days after my testimony] from a “volunteer position,” and why I was being treated so differently by him that afternoon. He only replied with “we have a new hire for your position,” and then said, “I will need to walk you to the door; you now have no clearance to walk freely.” As I walked to the door (which was approximately a football field away in distance), he walked behind me. The feeling from him was cold as if I did something criminal. His demeanor was completely opposite of how he used to conduct himself in my presence. Prior to the testimony, I gave in court, the supervisors would tell me how thankful they were to have me and my expertise. I decided to continue to work with the family as a life coach and mentor, volunteering my time to help them get their son back. Their case with Christopher is currently back in the county courts, after going to the appellate courts and the supreme courts of Oregon. CPS has moved toward adoption, permanently removing the child from them and terminating their rights as parents. Eric has a normal high school diploma and tested in the middle of his class. Amy also has a normal high school diploma. The two of them have newer vehicles, a three-bedroom, two-bath house and live in Redmond, Oregon. Recently, Amy gave birth to another healthy boy, named Hunter. Even though this new baby is viewed as a “new case,” CPS came into the hospital and took Hunter from his parents. They did not do any investigation to see if this child was at risk. They simply took him. When the worker arrived, he was not even prepared to take the newborn infant. He had to ask the hospital for diapers, wipes, blankets, an outfit, formula and did not once ask the nurses about the care of the infant with the parents. I had spent hours with the family in the hospital, and they kept hourly records of their child (e.g., when he nursed, when he wet the diaper when he had a bowel movement, etc.). They were very caring, attentive, happy, and in love with their new baby boy. The night before CPS came to take the child, they informed me that they were coming to take the infant. I offered my home to CPS for the child, and that I would provide 24/7 observation with the family in my home, and that I would work from home to give this mother a chance to bond while CPS did their “investigation.” They refused. The next morning, I emailed the case worker peer-reviewed journal articles explaining the neuroscience regarding the trauma that occurs to an infant when it is taken from his mother, and how the first several weeks are a very crucial time for nutrition (from breast milk), bonding and attachment development. He emailed me back with, “Can I call you?” However, he never called. He came that day at 2:00 pm and took the infant. In court the next Tuesday we pleaded to have the child returned to me as a caregiver so that Amy could nurse and bond with the infant. The judge agreed to have CPS perform a background on me and encouraged the infant to return to the mother with 24/7 monitoring until CPS was done with their investigation. To this day, they still have not performed a background check on me. I have sent probably 20 emails. We are now asking for an expedited court date and want to expose this case. It is criminal and inhumane what CPS is doing. If you have any ideas; (i.e. contacts for news stories, lawyers, or other organizations that you feel you can connect me to; I would be most appreciative. Please send all inquiries to email@example.com See updates on news coverage and up to date info and news investigations https://www.facebook.com/ReturnChrisandHunter/ Thank you so much for your support!!!
Pass Melissa's Law in Oregon
On December 13th, 2001, our 14-year-old daughter Melissa was tragically raped, sodomized, and murdered in the backyard of a neighbor while on her way to school. The loss of Melissa could have been prevented, if all rape kits were processed by Portland police. In 1997, three teenagers were dragged behind houses and raped. Two rape kits were not processed until years later, after Melissa was murdered, finally connecting them to our case. Had they been tested with urgency, her killer would most likely have been in jail and not free to kill our daughter. We expect police to test rape kits in a timely and efficient manner; but this is not the case. In July of 2002 we were assured by law enforcement that the backlog of rape kits would be processed. Now in 2016, there are twice as many backlogged. We’re calling on the Oregon House to pass Melissa’s Bill, which will require police to pick up rape kits within seven days of a hospital alerting them and submit the kit for testing within 14 days of receipt. Melissa’s Bill will also provide $1.5 million to the state crime lab to hire nine new DNA and biology evidence technicians to help process the kits. State police will be required to give annual updates to lawmakers on the progress of their testing of kits. In Portland alone there are over 2,000 backlogged and untested rape kits. There are 5,000 throughout the state. This is unacceptable. Melissa’s Bill was just passed by the Oregon Senate. We’re so close to getting it passed in the House and signed into law. That’s why your signature is so important. No family should have to go through a loss like ours. Please sign our petition and ask the Oregon House to pass Melissa’s Bill. Mary Bittler, Tom Bittler & Teresa McPherson
Stop Kate Brown from turning her back on Oregon's mental health crisis!
Kate Brown is proposing shutting down the Junction City Mental Health Hospital that she spent $130 million dollars building just 18 short months ago; not to mention displacing the 422 employees that work there. Her proposed budget increases school funding 9% to just over $8 billion dollars while shutting down a greatly needed facility that will only save $34.5 million dollars a year. Did I mention that she is also proposing to shut down a youth offenders facility in Warrenton and trim state funding to Oregon's Community Care organizations ? Where are your priorities Kate? She wants to raise taxes by $900 million, and raise reserves to over $1 billion which will be the biggest stock pile in the states history. Even without Kate's tax increases, general fund revenues are projected to be 8.3% higher ($19.45 billion) in the 2017-19 than in the current two-year budget. Kate is turning her back on the mental health crisis that Oregon is faced with. Stand together and stop her madness!
Oregon Carbon Tax
Climate change is a very pressing issue in the world today. Everyone will experience the effects of climate change, and many people already have. Glaciers are melting and sea levels are rising causing the destruction of homes on many islands and in many coastal communities. Weather patterns are changing leading to an adaptation in where certain crops can be grown. This means many farms will have to switch the crops they produce, and some areas will no longer be able to grow crops at all. If we allow the fossil fuel industries to continue to wield their financial power in order to exercise control over governments and politicians, it will only get worse. Your children and grandchildren are likely to live in a world in which devastating natural disasters occur often and the only living animals are those that humans made sure would not go extinct. It is not too late to do our part, to make a difference, and to fight for a better future. One way a number of communities are fighting is by paying a carbon tax. If everyone, individuals and businesses alike, are legally required to pay a tax on the greenhouse gases they put into the atmosphere they will be motivated to reduce the pollution they produce. We, the undersigned, want our state, Oregon, to start paying a carbon tax and leading the rest of our country and the world toward a future in which we can live in peace with the environment and no longer have to fear the effects of climate change.
Reckless and Negligent Actions to Kill and/or Injure Passengers of LaVoy Finicum Vehicle
On January 26, 2016, driver LaVoy Finicum and four (4) passengers: Ryan Payne, Shawna Cox, Victoria Sharp (an 18 year old singer who had missed her ride with family) and Ryan Bundy, were traveling to John Day, Oregon, to deliver a presentation on the constitutional support of their actions. About 50 miles from their destination, they were stopped by unmarked vehicles and armed persons in civilian clothes (OSP & FBI). Upon sticking his unarmed hands out of the window, Ryan Payne attempted to communicate with individuals who had caused the stop and was immediately met by a gunshot which hit the side view mirror. Because of a "shoot now, ask questions later" intent by the shooters, the driver, LaVoy Finicum decided to try and reach the town of John Day, seeking intervention from the local sheriff. A few miles ahead, they met a roadblock and were again detained in a deep snowbank. For extensive evidence of the illegality of the roadblock, refer to https://www.facebook.com/loren.pearce3/posts/10208252511221071 Shots were fired at the truck from the beginning and even after LaVoy Finicum was neutralized, multiple shots were fired at the truck, which was stuck in the snow. Shots continued at the truck for several minutes until the screams of the passengers caused a pause. A lethal, metal bullet lodged in Ryan Bundy's shoulder, not a rubber bullet. The acts of the shooters manifest a wanton and criminal reckless disregard for the life and welfare of the passengers who were trapped in a disabled vehicle. The shooters had no idea who the passengers were, what their intent was or if they had been killed or injured. No passenger brandished a gun nor shouted any threats, rather they pleaded for mercy and for cessation of the shooting. Law enforcement manuals and court cases across the nation severely condemn unnecessary and excessive force when passengers are present and when there is no threat of harm to the officer(s). Even when a vehicle is still operable and/or still moving, most courts do not approve of shooting at passengers. In this case, the driver was down, the car disabled and the passengers showed not the slightest hint of threat to anybody. Nevertheless, the vehicle was blasted with a barrage of lethal bullets. If the American people were to allow such behavior without severe punishment to the offenders, a new precedent would be established that puts all of our lives in danger as more law enforcement are emboldened by their immunity from punishment. We call on Governor Kate Brown, FBI Director James B. Comey and other state and federal authorities to: 1. Protect all evidence from spoilation and tampering 2. Investigate the forensic evidence 3. Release all videos and audio recordings of the incident including that of the passengers 4. Punish the offenders, including those in charge, with the maximum penalties the law allows. For an eyewitness account please see: https://www.facebook.com/105477983124317/videos/vb.105477983124317/226748380997276/?type=2&theater We plan to file a Criminal Complaint with the United States District Court for Oregon and seek a Federal Grand Jury Indictment of OSP and FBI and others responsible for the violation of the Rights of those in the vehicle(s) stoped in a January 26, 2016 Road Block on Hwy 395 in Oregon in which LaVoy Finicum was killed. For Violation of: U.S.C. TITLE 18 - Section § 241. Conspiracy against rightsIf two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured - They shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life. U.S.C. TITLE 18 - Section § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of lawWhoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.By signing this petition, you support our Action to be filed in the United States Court for the District of Oregon to demand a Grand Jury. Thank You
Tell blue states to form an interstate single-payer healthcare system for their residents
We call on Governors Jerry Brown of California, Andrew Cuomo of New York, Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Dannel Malloy of Connecticut, and governors of other Democratic states to explore the possibility of forming an interstate, single-payer healthcare system for their residents. Ideally, this system would provide ALL residents of these states equal, quality health coverage which would be accepted in any of these states. It would be funded by the collective healthcare budgets of these states, as well as reallocated federal funding for programs such as Medicaid. According to a Gallup poll published on May 16, 2016, 58% of Americans say that they would prefer to replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) with a federally funded healthcare system that provides insurance for all Americans. However, Congress has been in a deadlock on this issue for decades. Switching from the current system -- a hodgepodge of employer-based and subsidized care for the most needy -- to single-payer has for many seemed too drastic a change for Congress to successfully implement nationally. A few states, including CA, MA, VT, and CO have discussed or tried to establish single-payer systems confined to their own states. But such systems have been bombarded with budget concerns and do not create a clear path to single-payer on the national level. In light of this, we propose that by first forming an interstate single-payer system among a few powerful blue states, the country can gradually and steadily replace the current system with an efficient, potentially national, single-payer system as more and more states, including red states, will want to join in years to come if they see it is working well. Call it AmeriCare? Furthermore, we believe it would be in the interest of our states to be part of initiating this project. If acted upon, it would uniquely provide all the benefits of single-payer to residents and businesses, and show that our states are leading the way in reform on this important issue. FAQ: Why CA, NY, MA, and CT? I want my state in too. The author of this petition has lived in the four states mentioned, hence why they were selected, but governors of other states are on this petition's list of recipients. And residents of all states are welcome to sign and encourage their states to join too! Is this constitutional? It appears so. This would likely be an interstate compact, which Congress has the power to allow. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_compact
Keep Laila Home
My husband and I have been fostering our biological niece for almost two years now. We live in the state of Kentucky but the child is from the state of Oregon. Now after two years and non stop fighting for the child and her best interests, Oregon is making us send her back to live with a foster family that is not even related to her. We have had people in the state of Oregon with a state agency make up stories and false allegations against my family in front of judges and other hearings. The court appointed attorney for the child told a reporter in Oregon that my husband and I are "horrible people but what can you expect from people from Kentucky, they are all related". This is the type of person the state of Oregon has looking out for the interest of their foster kids. There is something majorly wrong with a system that does not believe that family is what is best for the children. We love our niece and want what is best for her. This is the first stable home she has been in since birth. This child has been through so much trauma in the first 2 years of life before she came to live with us. Now she is happy and is doing really good and is able to function like a normal little girl. Two therapist here in the state of Kentucky have stated in writing that moving her out of her safe environment would be damaging to her. Please help fight to keep Laila safe in her home with family here in Kentucky.