Some 49 Senators (including two coal-state Democrats who are probably toast in 2018 no matter what) have co-sponsored S.J.Res. 24, a "resolution of disapproval" aiming to gut the EPA's carbon emissions plan. Why? Because they're doing what their big donors tell them to do. No, really, that is the reason. They'll say it's other things, like "states' rights," even though the EPA's Clean Power Plan already empowers states to come up with their own plans for meeting the EPA's goals. And they'll use "small businesses" as a human shield, like always, citing the higher utility prices small businesses will have to pay if we have to produce more of our power from solar and wind and suchlike, never mind the higher prices we're all going to pay for everything if we don't, or that big utilities use any excuse to jack prices up anyway. No, they're protecting their big donors' ability to gild the plumbing in their 19th vacation home. But they don't get all the say around here! The Sierra Club helps you tell your Senators to support the Clean Power Plan and reject legislation that would weaken or destroy it.
Meanwhile, H.R. 2393 is called the Country of Origin Labeling Amendments Act, but it doesn't "amend" country-of-origin labeling laws for meat so much as it repeals them. The House passed H.R. 2393 in June, but the Senate hasn't taken it up yet. Perhaps they know how unpopular repealing country-of-origin labeling laws are! They'll say their hands are tied, of course, since the World Trade Organization ruled that our country-of-origin labeling laws violated at least two "free" trade agreements and put other nations at an "unfair" competitive disadvantage. If it's not entirely clear to you how merely mentioning where meat comes from constitutes a "disadvantage," you're not alone. And of course, this is the same Congress that wants to ram another "free" trade deal, the Trans-Pacific "Partnership," down the throats of the people. I know it ain't just me who sees the essential relationship between two of the most unpopular legislatives in America. CREDO helps you tell your Senator to reject H.R. 2393 and save our country-of-origin meat labeling laws from the nullifying force of trade agreements.
Finally, H.R. 2654/S. 1512, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, may have a shot at getting passed, since the Senate version, at least, demonstrates some collaboration between Democrat Bob Casey, Jr., of Pennsylvania and Republicans Dean Heller of Nevada and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act would mandate that employers make reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers on the job -- which may mean something as small as letting an employee sit down to do her job or carry around a water bottle or have more access to the rest room -- and would forbid rejecting a job applicant just because she's pregnant, or requiring pregnant employees to take unpaid leave if reasonable accommodations can be made, or otherwise retaliating against an employee for getting pregnant. That anyone would do that may seem incomprehensible -- until you remember that corporations are actually quite anti-family, since families distract workers from the important business of making the CEO as much money as possible. But Moms Rising helps you tell your Congressfolk to support the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
Comments