S. 1810, the FAMILY Act, would give Americans up to 60 days of paid family leave annually, with which we could take care of sick family members or take care of our own health problems. Basically, anyone eligible for unpaid family leave under the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 would be eligible for paid family leave under the FAMILY Act. 12 weeks of unpaid leave represents an improvement over zero, but you've tried going without pay for 12 weeks, right? And 60 days of paid leave would still be less than other countries get, including some countries we don't like, like Russia (140 paid days annually!), China (90 days), and Saudi Arabia (70 days). Only three other countries on Earth, in fact, allow zero paid leave days, and if you haven't heard of the economic powerhouses of Swaziland, Lesotho, and Papua New Guinea, maybe there's a reason for that. Don't believe the hype about how the FAMILY Act would foment fraud (in my experience, bosses allow fraud through their laziness), or "kill jobs" (just like it has not done in any of the above-named nations), or include a massive tax hike (0.4 percent -- that's four-tenths of one percent, not "four percent," "liberal" media). So USAction helps you support the FAMILY Act.
Meanwhile, word on the street is that President Obama's trip to China to jump-start the Trans-Pacific "Partnership" -- the "free" trade deal that, as usual, means more freedom for CEOs to siphon money from other people's work, and therefore less freedom for you and I -- hasn't gone so well for him, which means it's gone plenty well for us! Still, there's no point in being complacent, so Open Media helps you tell our government to reject the TPP. Nearly three-quarters of the House Democratic caucus have gone on record opposing the TPP, which is heartening, until you remember that the House is currently controlled by Republicans, and that rather few Republicans oppose "free" trade anymore, and that those Republicans with a "Libertarian" bent are just the ones most likely to adore "free" trade. And yet opposition to to this "free" trade "deal" -- with its environmental and labor law-crushing "investor-state tribunals," its censorship of websites accused, not convicted of intellectual property theft, and its shipping of good American jobs overseas -- comes from both left and right in this country. That's real bipartisanship -- not the kind where Democrats and Republicans come together to do whatever corporations want, but the real kind. If Mr. Obama can't see it, we have to make him see it.
Finally, the Pew Environmental Trusts help you tell the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef that antibiotic abuse in feed animals is not sustainable. What's the hook here? McDonald's intends to convert, over the next few years, to using only "sustainable" beef, as defined by the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, and since McDonald's sells about 75 million burgers per second, that would be a big deal. Trouble is, the Roundtable doesn't deal with antibiotic abuse in its definition of sustainability, and the fact that we use almost four out of every five antibiotics prescribed in America, no, not on sick people or sick animals, but on healthy farm animals living in squalid conditions is patently not sustainable, since using antibiotics merely to fatten animals up results in bacteria becoming ever more resistant to antibiotics (not to mention weaker successive generations of feed animals). But the Roundtable is taking comments on its guidelines until the middle of May, so we have plenty of time to overwhelm them. Given how hard it is to get our government to do obvious things, a little pressure from an outside group like the Roundtable might do well. But only if they get outside pressure from us first.