Decision Maker

Wisconsin State House


Does Wisconsin State House have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Petitioning President of the United States, Wisconsin State Senate, Wisconsin State House, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, Mike Honda, Wisconsin Governor, Sean Duffy

Military Rape: change the sex offender requirements and law!!

I joined the military because I wanted to serve my country.  I served as a Lance Corporal in the Marines for over three years.  In that time I was raped and sexually assaulted.  When I decided to report the sexual assault I was led through a maze of questions and excuses and I was even discouraged from reporting the crimes. In the end, instead of getting justice I was ostracized and humiliated. I learned that that offenders are not required to disclose their crimes on their discharge papers, and is not on a background check if they get a Non-Judicial Punishment. Most veterans are honorable men and women who have served our country, but there are some who have committed serious crimes like rape and sexual assault during their service and the military has a responsibility to disclose that information for the sake of the public good. If they are not charged per a Court Martial, the Command does not have to make them register, they do not report to ANYONE that the active duty member has to register, and the crime will NOT always be on their criminal back ground. Most Commands do not turn in the paperwork to the proper Civilians to make sure it's on the background check. When asked why Members who got a Non-Judicial Punishment do not have to disclose on their discharge papers, some of the responses I was given were 1) It will take too long to create a national database or 2) the military is going green and it takes too much paper to add an extra check box to discharge papers, THE COMMAND FORGETS SOMETIMES?? This is part of a larger issue of rape within the military.  Some estimates reveal that more than 1/3 of women in the armed services are raped during their service and of the reported rapes, 55% are males.  If you serve in the US military and you rape or sexually assault a fellow service member you have an 86.5% chance of keeping the crime a secret and a 92% chance of avoiding court martial.   Let's get this changed, and make it a requirement that Sex Crimes in the Military should be taken serious, and even if punishment is suspended, or does not go to Court Martial, it should still be on their background for employers and citizens to see while performing a back ground check. And to also include Active Duty Military in our current Database if they were charged per Court Martial (punishment suspended or dropped) Non Judicial Punishment or any form of punishment. If charged one way or another with a sex crime, he/she should also not be allowed to live in Base Housing. Please call (703) 571-3343 and continute to ask WHY they are ignoring our request. Join me in asking the Department of Defense to report criminal history (Military crimes INCLUDING NJP) on their DD214 and request that suspending punishment when being charged with a sex crime not be allowed, Include in Policies and orders that reports MUST be turned into local courthouses to ensure the member registers as a sex offender !!  CONTACT   military.rape12@gmail.com to send stories, ask for help, need to talk, or media inquiries.

Nicole Meserole
373,247 supporters
Petitioning Donald Trump, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, Department of Veterans Affairs, Alabama State Senate, Alabama State House, Alabama Governor, Florida State Senate, Florida State House, Flo...

Congress: Let all children of U.S. military service members unite with their families!

I’m Jenifer Bass, a U.S. Navy veteran, who served for 10 years, one-third in the Asia-Pacific region. It was due to my travel between ports in countries like Japan and Thailand that I first encountered amerasian children, and descendants, of U.S. service members and civilian contractors previously stationed overseas. In the Philippines alone, more than 52,000-plus children were born and left behind after the U.S. Navy withdrew the last of its military personnel in 1992. Right now, the U.S. government won’t legally recognize them as U.S. citizens, despite having been born to an American parent. The Philippine Embassy won't help them either. Today, there are estimated to be more than 250,000-plus children. Many amerasians are caught in a no-man’s land of discrimination and poverty -- most left behind by U.S. service members who are unaware that they’ve fathered children overseas. My friend John Haines is one of these sailors. In 2011, John discovered he was the father of a half-Filipino daughter, Jannette. He attempted to unite with her through the American Homecoming Act -- but was frustrated to learn that the Act did not apply to Filipino children of U.S. service members. Today, all John wants is to  be united with his daughter and grandchildren. He, like so many other veterans are living with a “hole in their hearts” as they search for ways to unite with their children. There is hope. The Uniting Families Act of 2017 creates a specialized visa allowing military veterans and eligible civilian contractors to sponsor their children and grandchildren for U.S. citizenship. Blood relationship must be proven by DNA test and the total number of visas granted will be capped at 5,000 each year. The issue takes on more urgency as so many of our veterans from our wars in Southeast Asia are getting older and dying each day -- without the chance to connect, or in some cases, reconnect with their own children.  John’s daughter Jannette has already undertaken the DNA testing process, conclusively proving her relationship to her American father. All she’s waiting for is the opportunity to permanently unite with her father. There is a PBS documentary, "Left by the Ship" (2010), documenting a day in the  life and the personal struggles as a Filipino amerasian on the never ending search for identity and their struggle to connect to their American military fathers. Please sign this petition to tell Congress that these families cannot wait another day. Pass the Uniting Families Act of 2017 now!

Jenifer Bass
33,208 supporters
Petitioning Wisconsin Governor

Please Pass Juvenile Interrogation Protection Law In Wisconsin

My name is Barbara Tadych. My son Brendan Dassey was wrongfully convicted of murder in the state of Wisconsin in 2007, on the basis of a coerced false confession to the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach. Please join with me in asking the state of Wisconsin to enact new legislation in order to prevent other minors from suffering the same fate as my son Brendan. Brendan’s case highlights the need for the enactment of legislation which would require that an attorney be present during a custodial interrogation of a minor. There is no evidence whatsoever to support my son’s conviction, and physical evidence flatly contradicts the statements he gave to his interrogators. At the time he confessed, Brendan was only 16 years old. My son spent his childhood struggling with a learning disability. At the time of his interrogation, he had an IQ of about 70. He had no criminal record, and he was not a trouble maker. Police initially turned their attention to him because he was a defense witness for his uncle, Steven Avery, who at the time had been accused of murdering Halbach. The Netflix series “Making a Murderer” has brought renewed attention to Brendan’s case. The 10-part documentary details the murder of Teresa Halbach and the controversy surrounding her death. Video clips of Brendan’s interrogation, which are presented in the documentary, have left many viewers wondering how Brendan’s confession was ever deemed admissible at trial. The video clips seen in the documentary, focus on Brendan’s final interrogation before his arrest. That interrogation session was the fourth time Brendan had been interrogated without a parent or an attorney present, all within the span of 48 hours. Audio and video recordings show how interrogators quickly brought Brendan under their control. Video footage shows that Brendan was willing to go along with any story line they suggested. Working to build a narrative that Brendan was with his uncle Steven at the time of the murder, investigators told Brendan that Avery had done something to the victim’s head, and asked him what it was. Brendan responded that Steven had cut her hair. No matter how many times the interrogators asked what else Steven had done to the victim’s head, they drew a blank from Brendan. Finally, they became frustrated and told Brendan that Halbach had been shot in the head, at which point he agreed. When the case went to trial, the jury was led to believe that Brendan told police during questioning that Halbach had been shot in the head. Just like that, unreliable information obtained from an improper interrogation of a juvenile, was presented as factual damning evidence in court. The head wound evidence is just one example to show how police were able to manipulate a juvenile into providing unreliable information. In fact, the entire narrative which resulted from Brendan’s interrogation, makes no sense at all. I spoke with Brendan shortly after his final interrogation ended. He recanted his confession the moment he was out of reach of his interrogators. I asked him why he told the police that he was involved. Brendan responded, “They got to my head.” It was at this time that I knew my son had been wrongfully pressured by police to provide false information. I know my son. He was not capable at the time of dealing with the overwhelming stress which was put on him by those detectives. I urge everyone to please view Brendan’s interrogation videos to see what I am talking about. If you do, I am confident that you will see that two seasoned interrogators manipulated my son into providing false information. The story that Brendan provided to the police just doesn’t add up. According to Brendan’s confession, he and Steven raped and repeatedly stabbed Halbach in Steven’s bedroom, while she was chained to a bed. Forensic tests, however, revealed no trace of the victim’s blood, fingerprints or DNA in Steven’s room, or, for that matter, anywhere at all in his residence. Nor was any physical trace of Brendan’s presence found in the room or in Steven’s residence. Police photos show that the premises were undisturbed except for ordinary clutter. Not one scrap of physical evidence suggested that a bloody assault had taken place there. My heart breaks when I watch Brendan’s police interrogation videos. The footage shows that Brendan had no idea what was happening to him. He was gullible and easily bullied into giving false information. He agreed to an impossible murder scenario that simply could not have happened. If Brendan had an attorney with him during his interrogations; this completely unreliable narrative would have never developed in the first place. According to the Bluhm Legal Clinic: “researchers have concluded that most youth – even those who might be considered "street-smart" – simply do not understand their Miranda rights to counsel and to remain silent. Accordingly, these children do not exercise those essential rights and are thus left alone during police interrogation, without the assistance of counsel, a friendly adult, or their parents. Too often, the child's resulting statement is involuntary or unreliable.” The United States Supreme Court describes a custodial interrogation as an interrogation where: "a reasonable person would have felt he or she was not at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave." Even if a minor has the legal right to get up and walk out, the vast majority of minors would have no idea that they had that option. My son certainly did not. Therefore, it is reasonable to view any interrogation of a minor as a custodial interrogation. For these reasons, new legislation should impose the following safeguards: Require that an attorney be present during any custodial interrogation of a minor. This should be viewed as a nonwaivable right. Require law enforcement to inform a minor before an interrogation begins that he or she could be charged as an adult based on information obtained during an interrogation. Wisconsin law currently falls short, as it only requires law enforcement to immediately attempt to notify the child’s parent or guardian. The state does not specify whether juveniles have the right to the presence of an attorney or a parent during questioning. Thankfully, in 2005, the Wisconsin Supreme Court exercised its supervisory power to require that all custodial interrogations of juveniles be recorded. The recording of my son’s interrogation provides a clear cut example of why minors need further protection. The Bluhm Legal Clinic has modeled legislation which can be used as a guideline for legislators looking to improve the system. Their recommendations can be viewed here: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/legalclinic/wrongfulconvictionsyouth/resources/legislation/ The state of Wisconsin made a promising move in the right direction by recognizing the need for recorded interrogations. They now need to further their efforts by enacting legislation to protect minors during interrogations. This petition is managed by Injustice Anywhere for Barbara Tadych. FreeBrendan.org Free Brendan Facebook Page Justice for Brendan Dassey Facebook Group

Barbara Tadych
13,876 supporters
Petitioning President of the United States

Remove the penalty that prevents people with disabilities from marrying!

When we think of marriage equality, we think about the ongoing fight LGBT couples face, but another minority group must deal with the stark reality that they are better off living in long-term committed relationships, without marriage. Like LGBT couples, these couples are denied the right to over 1,100 rights afforded to married couples. They have been denied access into their loved ones hospital rooms, faced family disputes over wills and have been denied spousal benefits from their partners workplace or the government in the event of their partners death. These are people with disabilities. Many people rely on the government for medical and financial assistance. Without medical insurance they would have no way to live independently. They would be forced into nursing homes (some already are), which would cost the government significantly more than getting Medicare and/or Medicaid does. At the same time, this assistance comes with a price. The government expects married couples to share income and that affects any assistance the couple receives. For many, their spouse makes too much (even if they make meager SSDI payments). This cuts into the healthcare services these couples receive. For some, their able-bodied partners make too much to allow them to qualify for medical assistance, if married, but not enough to pay out of pocket for costly medical equipment, medicine, or any other needs the disabled partner has. Add in the fact that even when a person with a disability can work, the opportunity for quality medical insurance is hard to find, due to their pre-existing condition and you will understand why many couples with disabilities are forced to live in domestic partnerships. Also, if two people with disabilities marry and they are on SSI or SSDI, their payments are CUT significantly, making it hard for them to maintain independence and afford their own food, shelter, clothing or other necessities. The time to stand up is now!! Let your Senators and Representatives know you want to remove the income caps placed on individuals with disabilities, so they can keep the government assistance and still be able to get married. Every loving couple deserves the right to marry. No one should have to choose between their wheelchair and their love, their therapy and their love, their medication and their love, their ability to eat or have a roof over their head and their love!! Those are not choices!! Help make it possible for those with disabilities to share their love without being penalized!Join our fight for marriage equality for people with disabilities:https://www.facebook.com/MarriageEqualityForPeopleWithDisabilities

Dominick Evans
6,481 supporters
Victory
Petitioning Wisconsin State House, Wisconsin State Senate, Wisconsin Governor

#SaveOurBucks - Approve the new Milwaukee arena funding proposal!

The Bucks are hoping to build a new arena in downtown Milwaukee. Their new ownership group will be paying $150 million towards this effort and former owner, Senator Herb Kohl, will also contribute $100 million for a total of $250 million. This represents half to cost towards a new arena. The local city/state government needs to approve a funding plan for the remaining $250 million. If a new arena is not built or at least under construction by 2017, the NBA can purchase the Bucks for $575 million (well below market value) and relocate the team. This new arena is not just about the Bucks, it's about revitalizing downtown Milwaukee and helping this city realize it's vast potential. Please sign this petition! Thank you! #SaveOurBucks

Max Margulis
3,864 supporters
Petitioning Wisconsin State Senate, Wisconsin State House, dana burmaster, Dave Ross, WI DOT

Baraboo Bluff Winery should be allowed on Hwy attraction sign ~ Goal 25K signers

Wisconsin Department of Transportation has final say on what companies can be listed on the blue Specific Information Signs (SIS).  We applied in 2015 and were denied because it was our first year and did not have annual visitor numbers.  In 2016 we were denied because we were not open enough hours during the week.  We pointed out two other wineries that were on these signs with the exact same hours as ours... no response.  For 2017 they denied us because we do not offer tours.  Anyone that has been to our winery know that the attraction is the view from the side of the Baraboo Bluff Range.

FRED QUANDT
2,960 supporters
Petitioning Alabama State House, Alaska State House, Arizona State House, Arkansas State House, California State House, Colorado State House, Hawaii State House, Idaho State House, Illinois State House, Indian...

Save Lives: Require Spinal Muscular Atrophy Newborn Screening

August is Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) Awareness Month. Please join our efforts to require SMA newborn screening, and help end the deadly effects of SMA.  About SMA: •  SMA is the number one genetic killer of babies and children under the age of two.•  SMA is a motor neuron disease like ALS.•  SMA robs the ability to move, swallow, and eventually breathe. •  One in 40 unknowingly carries the gene responsible for SMA.•  When two carriers have a baby, there is a 25% chance the baby will have SMA, a 50% chance the baby will be a carrier, and a 25% chance the baby will be unaffected.•  One in 10,000 babies is born with SMA.  The FDA approved Spinraza as the first treatment for SMA on December 23, 2016. However, newborns continue to go untreated when they would receive the most benefit, as no states are performing SMA newborn screening. Newly diagnosed Type 1 SMA babies treated with Spinraza didn't lose their ability to move, swallow, and breathe, but instead gained strength. Some even crawled and took steps — steps away from the deadly effects of SMA. Newborn babies treated within the first two weeks never lost abilities to SMA, and developed as average babies do. They crawl, eat, stand, and walk. Only newborns with older SMA siblings have been treated this way, as their parents knew to screen for SMA. Every newborn needs to be screened for SMA, so babies born with SMA can develop just as babies without SMA do.  For this to happen, SMA needs to be added to the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP), states need to require SMA newborn screening, and funding needs to be provided for SMA newborn screening. The Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (Committee) is scheduled to vote to add SMA to the RUSP at its February, 2018 meeting. Once the Committee votes favorably to add SMA to the RUSP, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will add SMA to the RUSP. This is an important step, as many states look to the RUSP when adding new conditions to screen for. This petition will be delivered to both the Committee, and the Secretary of HHS. States also need to require newborn screening, as the RUSP is only a recommendation, it does not mandate states to test for conditions. We will continue to pursue SMA newborn screening in every state, and this petition will help our efforts. Missouri is the only state to enact newborn screening legislation, and will begin screening for SMA in January of 2019. Federal and state funds are also needed to begin and continue SMA newborn screening. This petition will help us as we advocate for funding with the appropriate federal and state congressional members. Act Now: With an FDA-approved treatment, it is urgent we secure SMA newborn screening. Newborn babies treated within the first two weeks will have the best chance at progressing as they would without SMA. Every baby born with SMA should be afforded this life-saving treatment. Please sign our petition urging Committee to vote to add SMA to the RUSP, urging states to require SMA newborn screening, and urging federal and state congressional members to provide funding for SMA newborn screening.   

Hunter Has Hope
1,580 supporters
Petitioning Muriel Bowser (D. C. - Mayor), Dannel Malloy, Asa Hutchinson, John Hickenlooper, Rick Scott, Nathan Deal, David Ige, Bruce Rauner, Eric Holcomb, Kim Reynolds, Sam Brownback, John Bel Edwards, Paul ...

Stop The Statute of Limitations (SOL) on Sex Crimes - Sexual Assault, Pedophilia, Rape

My WWII hero father once said to me, “You should never take advantage of someone that is weak or vulnerable just because you can." Little did he know how much his simple words would one day mean to his beloved daughter as the 1st survivor of 10 (4 in SOL 6 outside of it) known victims to report a 15 yr active & violent serial rapist who continuously got off with slaps on the wrist.  The time is NOW to Stop The Statute of Limitations on Sex Crimes for children and adults. Sign petition & share! http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/December-2016/Marc-Winner/ Please click link above about sadistic & emboldened rapist Marc Winner to understand the gravity of predators like him and read below to understand more why we must #StopTheStatute of limitations on sex crimes, once and for all. __________________________________________ Over 16 years, I hoped and prayed this day would actually never come, because although I knew he couldn’t stop-it was my greatest wish that he would, so no one else would be violently raped by him again. Painfully, that was not the case with 4 in the SOL and 10 total we know about in a 15 year period. The continuous promises made to me when they wanted me to be okay with the plea deal, were not kept. Woman after woman reported him only to be disbelieved and disregarded, because of archaic belief systems even within the justice system and Chicagoland Cook County City and Suburbs being on different computer systems. How senseless is that? This has not been an easy road. It’s actually been harder than I would ever be able to explain. My sister and brother survivors understand why sexual assault is the most under reported crime, because coming forward in order to protect others from a monster has no upsides due to the revictimization of stigma, harassment, a pretty inept and broken system, and those who want to make rape of all things about politics or shaming and blaming the survivor rather than stopping the perp. It’s been a long 16+ years with much joy after I came to terms with the unthinkable, but I really got thrown for a loop that invasion day almost two years ago now when I found out he was back or I should say never actually left. For he remained active and my reporting him, going to all our trial dates, and his slap on the wrist plea deal didn’t keep him from continuing his proclivity to do irreparable and permanent harm. I do not feel any of the unfounded shame or blame any longer. I could really careless what the ignorant callous bullies towards survivors of rape think or say either. I do however feel an immense responsibility to my sisters who survived him, all sister and brother survivors, and the community at large to see this through to the end-to finish this-and to help convict him anyway that I lawfully can so he never hurts another living soul again. Many confusingly mock and attack survivor activists who put it all on the line to stop criminals by using the term social justice warrior as a negative connotation on the internet and elsewhere. However, what they don’t seem to understand is that this is NOT a political issue and a violent despicable crime such as rape can never be referred to as “social.” It’s a matter of stopping a violent criminal from seriously hurting others in a way that the survivors receive a life sentence. Rape is actually a CRIMINAL JUSTICE issue-always has been, always will be. As a Criminal Justice issue, one way to end the emboldening of predators like Marc Winner, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, James Toback, Kevin Spacey, Brett Ratner, Louis CK, Larry Nassar, Roger Ailes, the many that hurt Corey Feldman & Corey Haim, and Denny Hastert (to name only a small few) is to stop the SOL clock. Predators know very well that they have a time clock they can easily run out during the often decades of time it takes a victim to come forward and be a survivor. The time is NOW to #StopTheStatute of Limitations on ALL sex crimes such as Sexual Assault and Harassment in every state for children and adults once and for all. There are no statutes in different states on Forgery, types of Fraud, Murder, Manslaughter, Attempted Murder, Arson, types of DUI accidents, and even in a few on Rape, but a few isn’t good enough-Rape is a life sentence, so should be the time period it takes to report it (which remember does not mean the lack of burden of proof) in order to help deter. The system needs to give survivors the time they need to come to terms with the heinous violation to their body and spirit in order to get closure and justice-How can’t everyone have some common sense, reasonably understand, and get behind that? #metoo #Ibelieveyou#stopthestatute

Lesley Barton
1,231 supporters
Closed
Petitioning Wisconsin State House, Wisconsin State Senate, Wisconsin Governor, Paul Ryan

Accountability: PROSECUTE Ken Kratz for the LAWS HE BROKE

The innocent have paid with years of incarceration, hopelessness, families broken, and defamation of character. The GUILTY MUST PAY THEIR PRICE. While prosecuting Brendan Dassey & Steven Avery, Ken Kratz broke the following laws*: Wisconsin Rule of Professional Conduct 3.6(2)(a) prohibits lawyers from making public statements that the lawyer “knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated by means of public communication and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.” Rule 3.6(2)(b) prohibiting attorneys in a criminal case, from publicizing “the possibility of a plea of guilty to the offense or the existence of the contents of any confession, admission or statement by the defendant or suspect.” Rule 3.8 “the special responsibilities of a prosecutor” state that “a prosecutor can, and should, avoid comments which have no legitimate law enforcement purpose and have a substantial likelihood of increasing public opprobrium of the accused." KRATZ Knowingly & willingly engaged in corruption, malfeasance and.... literally broke laws. We have joined our voices in outrage to free the innocent; join them now again to punish the guilty. *(credit to Steve Drizin's blog on HuffPost for spelling it out for us)

Marianne Huynh
392 supporters
Petitioning Wisconsin State Senate, Wisconsin State House, Jerry Petrowski, Alvin Ott

Create a "Type 3 Motorcycle" (Autocycle) in Wisconsin

The outdoors are our passion.  We are a family-owned, power sports dealer located in Altoona, Wisconsin.  Our doors opened in 1981 and we haven't stopped serving our community since.  When Polaris released their latest motorcycle, the three-wheeled Slingshot, we were hooked.  With side by side seating, steering wheel, seat belts, and a five speed manual transmission, it is truly an automobile unlike any other. The Polaris Slingshot is currently able to be registered in the state of Wisconsin as a "Type 2 Motorcycle" which restricts drivers to hold a valid motorcycle license. By creating the "Type 3 Motorcycle", or Autocycle category, consumers who want to drive these types of vehicles would need to only have a valid drivers license. This legislation would enable many more consumers who are interested in these products, easier access to them. The 2015 Bills that were introduced, AB435 and SB348, were adversely disposed of at the end of the last legislature session (April 7, 2016). Our neighboring state, Minnesota, adopted similar autocycle legislation that allowed their residents to operate the Polaris Slingshot with a valid drivers license starting August 1, 2016. Many other states are following suit and drafting their own autocycle legislation. We want to show the Wisconsin Legislature that the people of Wisconsin WANT this change.  Sign your name to help make this legislative change possible in Wisconsin!

Sport Rider Inc.
314 supporters
Wisconsin: Require a criminal background check for EVERY gun sale

February 6, 2014 Dear Concerned Constituents, Thank you for contacting me with your support of AB138/SB24 supporting universal background checks for gun sales in our state. I appreciate the fact that you have taken the time to share your thoughts with me on this issue. Under these bills, it is prohibited that a person sells or transfers a firearm unless the sale or transfer occurs through a federally licensed firearms dealer and involves a background check of the prospective transferee. A person who is convicted of violating the prohibition is guilty of a misdemeanor and must be fined not less than $500 nor more than $10,000, may be imprisoned for not more than nine months, and may not possess a firearm for a period of two years. I fail to see the logic in not requiring criminal background checks for all legal gun sales. Countless mass shootings that have occurred around the United States over the past 15 years have demonstrated the need for more screening of who is purchasing firearms. Background checks would not present too considerable of an obstacle to normal gun buyers, but would ensure that guns do not fall through the legal cracks and into the hands of dangerous people who should not be permitted to own them. According to a 2013 Gallup poll, 83% of Americans support requiring background checks for all gun purchases. I side with this majority, and you can count on my continued support of more effective gun regulation in our state. Thank you again for your thoughts. Please feel free to contact me in the future if you have any additional questions, comments, or concerns regarding this or any other issue before the legislature. Sincerely, Sondy Pope State Representative 80th Assembly District

— Sondy Pope, State Representative
4 years ago
Tell Your Representatives: Don't punish Wisconsin police and physicians for protecting public safety!

Thank you for contacting me with your concern regarding LRB 2063. I appreciate the fact that you have taken the time to share your thoughts with me on this issue. LRB 2063, known as the Wisconsin Firearms Freedom Act, would prohibit state and local law enforcement from enforcing any sort of federal measure that bans certain types of guns (assault weapons and extended clip sizes), relates to firearm registration, or relates to the confiscation of firearms. This bill would punish any law enforcement official who tries to enforce federal gun laws with a Class A misdemeanor. LRB 2063 would also prohibit physicians (excluding psychiatrists) from asking a patient whether they own firearms or from requiring the patient to disclose such information before providing them treatment. Any physician who violates this provision would be subject to a fine up to $25,000 or up to 9 months in prison. The bill would also require all Wisconsin gun manufacturers to include a “Made in Wisconsin” stamp on all new guns produced, in the hope that they will not be able to be federally regulated if they do not cross state lines. LRB 2063 proposes that we prevent sensible federal regulations to decrease gun violence from being enforced. Although I support the 2nd Amendment right of law-abiding Americans to purchase guns, I fail to see the logic behind keeping assault rifles legal. In my view, banning assault weapons and extended magazines would do little to burden “responsible gun owners” and would do a lot in preventing needless gun deaths in our country. After the two shootings that occurred in Wisconsin this past year, I am in favor of having stricter regulations on gun laws. Many of my constituents have been writing me for months with concerns mutual to mine when it comes to gun laws. As an elected representative I take into consideration the concerns voiced by my constituents and if I agree with those concerns, as I do in this case, I will do whatever I can, along with my colleagues, to see restriction on gun laws implemented in our state. Therefore, I will not support the Wisconsin Firearms Freedom Act. LRB 2063 is still up for co-sponsorship, and only after that can it be referred to the appropriate committee for further amendments. I will keep your opposition to this bill in mind during this legislative session. Thank you once again for sharing your thoughts with me on this issue. If I can be of any further assistance to you on this, or any other state issues, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Sondy Pope State Representative 80th Assembly District

— Sondy Pope, State Representative
4 years ago
Tell Your Representatives: Don't punish Wisconsin police and physicians for protecting public safety!

Thank you for contacting me with your concern regarding LRB 2063. I appreciate the fact that you have taken the time to share your thoughts with me on this issue. LRB 2063, known as the Wisconsin Firearms Freedom Act, would prohibit state and local law enforcement from enforcing any sort of federal measure that bans certain types of guns (assault weapons and extended clip sizes), relates to firearm registration, or relates to the confiscation of firearms. This bill would punish any law enforcement official who tries to enforce federal gun laws with a Class A misdemeanor. LRB 2063 would also prohibit physicians (excluding psychiatrists) from asking a patient whether they own firearms or from requiring the patient to disclose such information before providing them treatment. Any physician who violates this provision would be subject to a fine up to $25,000 or up to 9 months in prison. The bill would also require all Wisconsin gun manufacturers to include a “Made in Wisconsin” stamp on all new guns produced, in the hope that they will not be able to be federally regulated if they do not cross state lines. LRB 2063 proposes that we prevent sensible federal regulations to decrease gun violence from being enforced. Although I support the 2nd Amendment right of law-abiding Americans to purchase guns, I fail to see the logic behind keeping assault rifles legal. In my view, banning assault weapons and extended magazines would do little to burden “responsible gun owners” and would do a lot in preventing needless gun deaths in our country. After the two shootings that occurred in Wisconsin this past year, I am in favor of having stricter regulations on gun laws. Many of my constituents have been writing me for months with concerns mutual to mine when it comes to gun laws. As an elected representative I take into consideration the concerns voiced by my constituents and if I agree with those concerns, as I do in this case, I will do whatever I can, along with my colleagues, to see restriction on gun laws implemented in our state. Therefore, I will not support the Wisconsin Firearms Freedom Act. LRB 2063 is still up for co-sponsorship, and only after that can it be referred to the appropriate committee for further amendments. I will keep your opposition to this bill in mind during this legislative session. Thank you once again for sharing your thoughts with me on this issue. If I can be of any further assistance to you on this, or any other state issues, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Sondy Pope State Representative 80th Assembly District Enter your response here…

— Sondy Pope, State Representative
4 years ago
Wisconsin Legislature and Governor Scott Walker: Protect Wisconsin’s mining moratorium law!

January 16, 2013 Dear Concerned Constituents, Thank you for contacting me with your concerns and opposition to modifying mining laws in Wisconsin. I appreciate that you have taken the time to share your thoughts with me on this issue. Your concerns about mining damaging our state’s natural resources are mutual with mine, as I am a strong believer in the importance of environmental protection. In the state Assembly, my colleagues and I are doing the best we can to advocate for strict regulations on mining in Wisconsin. Our state is ranked as one of the top 5 tourist destinations in the United States, a reputation that would be tarnished if visitors were to witness mining pollution. Assembly Bill 426, the mining bill proposed in the last legislative session, was a blatant attempt by Republicans in this state to water down strong regulations that have protected both the people and wildlife of Wisconsin for decades by separating the permitting process for the mining of iron from the mining of other metals. This bill would have also established a risky practice known as presumptive permitting. Under this policy, the DNR would have only 360 days to review plans for any proposed mine and either approve or deny a mining permit. Fortunately, thanks to the efforts of Senate Democrats and Sen. Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center), the bill stalled and eventually died. The fight is only beginning, however. State-wide elections held this November have left the Republicans with a 59-40 majority in the Assembly and an 18-15 majority in the Senate, meaning that a similar mining bill proposed this session would likely have the votes to pass both houses and eventually become law. Assembly Speaker-elect Robin Vos (R-Burlington) has indicated that he will make passing a bill loosening mining regulations his first priority for the upcoming legislative session. As your representative, I assure you that I will do everything within my power to fight against any legislation that threatens Wisconsin’s environment. Thank you once again for sharing your thoughts with me on this issue. If I can be of any further assistance to you on this, or any other state issues, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Sondy Pope State Representative 80th Assembly District

— Sondy Pope, State Representative
5 years ago