Decision Maker

Kelly Ayotte

  • NH
  • Senator

Does Kelly Ayotte have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Petitioning John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Kelly Ayotte, Rob Portman, Pat Toomey, Mark Kirk, Mike Lee, Jeff Flake, Dean Heller, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Robert Dold, Fred Upton, Richar...

Republican leaders: Take a stand against Trump & for Democracy!

Honorable Republican Senators and Representatives, Given your oath to support and defend the United States Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and given that you have publicly expressed criticism of Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, we implore you now to elevate duty to country over allegiance to party. We urge you to enjoin a bipartisan call for a special prosecutor to investigate the Russian cyberattacks that interfered with our election, as well as connections between Donald Trump, his campaign team and cabinet appointees, and Vladimir Putin and the Russian state. These issues are deeply concerning to Americans of all political affiliations. Our democracy will undoubtedly suffer under a Trump presidency. He shows little regard for rule of law, customs of governance, basic civility, conflicts of interest per the emoluments clause, and intelligence briefings. We cannot assume that once sworn in he will suddenly take an interest in defending the Constitution. His immigration policies alone violate the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments. His attacks on free speech and suggestion that people should be stripped of citizenship for exercising free speech are shocking. It’s time to stop pretending this is going to work out.  We have two chances to prevent Trump from taking office. The Electoral College meets on December 19th. We call on you to ensure that the 538 electors receive a full security briefing by the 19th, or take action to ensure that the vote is postponed. The Electoral College has the Constitutional duty to elect a president who is 1) qualified, 2) not a demagogue, 3) and is free of foreign entanglements. Donald Trump does not meet the second and third criteria, and it is debatable whether he has the qualifications and temperament to lead our nation. The Electoral College thus has the duty to reject Donald Trump. There is a growing elector movement to vote for another Republican presidential candidate. There are reports that as many as thirty Republican electors may vote their conscience against him on December 19th, which may result in a House election of the president, and Senate election of the vice-president. The second chance to intervene will be during the joint session of Congress to tally Electoral College votes on January 6th, 2017. We call on you to object to Trump votes on grounds of interference by a foreign government, violation of the emoluments clause, conflicts of interest, and nepotism. If these issues are not resolved, Donald Trump be in violation of the Constitution the moment he is sworn in to office, according to Richard Painter, the former chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush. Americans must unite and take action to defend democracy and our Constitution. If there is fear of blowback if these efforts fail, and fear of a violent uprising if they succeed - isn’t this the very reason that we must stop Trump? His tactic of reprisals against those who oppose him is the reason we need to stand up to his bullying. It only takes one person to say the emperor has no clothes, and - there is strength in numbers. In summary, in this perilous moment we ask that you call for security briefings for electors, postponement of the electoral college vote, and a broad special prosecutor investigation into every aspect of Russian involvement with Trump and his team. We respect your leadership, and we support you in taking what may be an unpopular stand within your party. We still have time to choose a different future for our country. But we only have a few days. Take a stand now.

Lisa Chacon
1,717 supporters
Petitioning Gene Green

Wildlife Gun Tax is Misguided: Urge legislators to remove hunting promotion restrictions

Further amend proposed bill to allow this outdated funding system to represent ALL wildlife interests. The proposed bill amendments in SB 2690/HB 4818 while proclaiming to modernize the Pittman-Robertson Act (PRA) are STILL FAILING to acknowledge that weapon taxes derived from the non-hunting public are not representing the estimated 80% of gun owners today who do not hunt. Whether they use shooting ranges or not is missing the point. The Pittman-Robertson Act (PRA) originated in 1937, in an era when the majority of gun owners were hunters. In striking contrast, only 1 in 5 gun owners engage in hunting today. So, why should NON-hunting derived tax dollars still be spent solely to promote hunting today?  Worse, not only must every state wildlife agency spend this money convincing the public that hunting is a wholesome family activity, agencies are actually forbidden to use dollars towards any program that might even be viewed as opposing hunting! What was once taxation with logical wildlife use representation has been hijacked and manipulated TO FURTHER THE AGENDAS OF A VERY VOCAL, WELL-CONNECTED MINORITY INTEREST. It is now illogical to the point of being disingenuous, and even dangerous when decision makers become desperate and force questionable agendas targeted at children. (You really should check out that link!) Federal tax funding should benefit all wildlife, all wildlife activities, and ALL citizens. We must demand that our elected officials do what the appointed state wildlife managers and commissions refuse to do:  Modernize the PRA weaponry funding system and its biased spending mandates. Please, go beyond signing this message to the bill sponsors. Your elected officials ALSO really need to hear from you about wildlife management today.. Click here to find your elected official using your zipcode and please take a moment to call and/or write and let them know the following: Dear (legislator).  Regarding SB 2690/HB 4818; “Modernizing the Pittman-Robertson Fund for Tomorrow’s Needs Act of 2016”. As your constituent …. I want you to know my opinion about how wildlife is managed in our state. I ask that you oppose the amendments in their entirety until the provisions are removed that still require spending federal tax dollars on pro-hunting programs. (If you are also a non-hunting gun owner be sure to mention that) _________________________________________________________________                                                        FAQ’s: Q: Wildlife watching brings my state so much more money than hunting does, yet the wildlife agency only promotes hunting. Why? A: The law currently gives wildlife agencies the political cover they need to control weapon tax funding to advance pro-hunting agenda. ONE OF THE REASONS we are demanding that the language be changed is TO REMOVE THE PROVISION THAT LIMITS FUNDING TO ONLY THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT OPPOSED TO HUNTING. Q: Who really “pays for wildlife” today, Vs what the agencies and sportsmen claim to? A: Two articles will help you obtain a critical-to-know understanding about wildlife funding. Please take the time to save and read them: “KILLING for FUN(DS)” 2016 “WILDLIFE CONSERVATION & MANAGEMENT FUNDING IN THE U.S.” - revised 2015 Q: Has anyone contacted the BILL sponsors about the inadequate amendments? A:   Yes, Center for Wildlife Ethics has started that ball rolling! See their letter, click here  This petition is targeted to those sponsors so you are speaking to them by signing today, but it is YOUR elected representatives who really need to know you are watching today! We may have been absent while our wildlife management was hijacked over past century -- but we are here now. It’s time to DEMAND THAT ALL WILDLIFE ACTIVITIES BENEFIT FROM THE FUNDING STRUCTURE - NOT JUST KILLING. Q: I don't want my wildlife agency to have access to taxes generated by non-hunter purchases because they will just spend them on more hunting programs! I don't trust them! So what am I signing here...? A.   UNFORTUNATELY, THE TAXATION SCHEME IS NOT VOLUNTARY. NON-CONSUMPTIVE USE TAXES ARE ALREADY BEING USED FOR THIS PURPOSE SO IT'S NOT AS IF CITIZENS HAVE A CHOICE. WE MUST START LEVELING THIS PLAYING FIELD. WE'RE ASKING FOR AN EQUAL SPLIT OF FUNDING SO ALL WILDLIFE ACTIVITIES CAN BENEFIT - NOT JUST CONSUMPTIVE USE.   Q: So what good will contacting my elected officials do? Why not just contact the sponsors? A.  The sponsors of this bill are obviously more on the side of this archaic and misguided funding mentality and believe being so will somehow help them politically. YOUR legislator needs to hear from you now, before s/he may be asked to vote on this bill.  Is your legislator one of the sponsors? Check here: Current HR 4818 Bill Sponsors                                              Bottom Line? NO ONE CAN ARGUE THAT EXPANDING THE FUNDING'S REACH TO INCLUDE NON-CONSUMPTIVE ACTIVITIES IS SOMEHOW HARMFUL TO WILDLIFE, SO IT PUTS THEM ON THE DEFENSE -- WHERE THEY RIGHTFULLY BELONG TODAY. #wildlifelaw  #wildlifeconservation      

Chris Stevens
787 supporters
Petitioning Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel

Eradicate US Army Toxic Leadership

To Whom It May Concern, I was the immediate supervisor for SPC Annzala Pitt at C.Co 225 BSB. In the time that SPC Pitt was part of my squad she encountered numerous difficulties which I believe were entirely due to being mistreated by her senior leadership. When SPC Pitt arrived at 225 BSB she had a medical situation that required attention prior to her deployment to Iraq. When she voiced her concerns to 1LT Riglick not only were her concerns dismissed but her private health information was erroneously released to multiple parties. SPC Pitt filed a complaint for the HIPPA violation against the offending party, 1LT Riglick. A few months later 1LT Riglick was assigned to C.Co as our Platoon Leader. This is undoubtedly the situation that caused SPC Pitt to be labeled as a problem soldier by C.Co leadership. SPC Pitt was not protected from reprisal and was treated badly for the duration of her time with C.Co 225 BSB. The result of filing her HIPPA complaint against 1LT Riglick was having a stigma placed on her by the very leadership that was supposed to be protecting her. She endured rumors, attacks on her character, and even attempts at discrediting her intellectual capacities. She was even accused of having inappropriate relationships with multiple senior Non-Commissioned Officers by our Platoon Leader 1LT Riglick. SPC Pitt continuously sought only to do her job as a mental health specialist and as her first line supervisor I pushed for her to be moved from the company to the Troop Medical Clinic. When SPC Pitt was sent to the Troop Medical Clinic to preform her duties as a mental health specialist C.Co leadership made sure to let the incoming social worker know what their impression of her was. SPC Pitt then worked with Major Ball, who had already been told she was a problem soldier, and was subsequently treated horribly to include having to undergo a mental health evaluation without provocation. SPC Pitt requested on numerous occasions to be moved from C.Co 225 BSB to another company, battalion, or division to get out from underneath the stigma placed on her. These requests were heard by our Company Commander, 1SG, Platoon Leader, Platoon Sergeant, Command Sergeant Major, and even Division Command team but nothing was done. Instead of helping the soldier 1LT Riglick and Major Ball ordered me to counsel her for their perceived insubordination. When I disagreed with these orders it was made clear that my military career was also in jeopardy. I was ordered by 1LT Riglick to counsel SPC Pitt for not properly using her chain of command to which, I informed the command that she had done exactly what procedures are outlined. The result of my not counseling her for this was to have my MEDPROS status changed to non-deployable by 1LT Riglick. This retaliation against me for defending SPC Pitt would have ended my career if I had not already been found deployable and fit for duty by the Medical Review Board in 2008. Despite her outburst which finally concluded her time in C.Co I would still recommend that she be retained by the United States Army. SPC Pitt endured being mistreated for months and still maintained a positive attitude. Her intellectual prowess combined with her willingness to work make her a viable asset. I believe that if SPC Pitt had been able to move to another command away from the toxic leadership of C.Co 225 BSB her military career would have flourished. SGT David Trapolsi    

384 supporters
Petitioning Lindsey Graham, Tim Scott, Lamar Alexander, Kelly Ayotte, Tammy Baldwin, John Barrasso, Michael Bennet, Richard Blumenthal, Roy Blunt, Cory Booker, John Boozman, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Richa...

Public Education Needs a Leader Who Knows About… well, Public Education!

Did you benefit from free public education? Do you have children who did? Do you have grandchildren currently in public schools?  Do you agree that public education is the basis of our free and democratic society?  Do you believe that public money should stay in public schools?  And do you agree that we should invest in our public schools? Regardless of whether you are a Republican or a Democrat... If you’re a “Public School Person,” please speak up. You do not have to work in the educational system to be concerned with the future of public schools. No one benefits from living in an uneducated society. Therefore, we are urging our senators in Washington to vote for a qualified educator as Education Secretary and whose ideas do not contradict the very beliefs that universal public education is built upon. Betsy DeVos has no experience in public education in any capacity, and her only education agenda is to take funds from neighborhood schools and give those funds to private schools and for-profit charters. We are asking that our US senators vote against the current nomination of Betsy DeVos - and to oppose any misguided policies that weaken public education. #StandUpforPublicEducation #VoteNoforDevos

Sarah Longshore
324 supporters