I'll admit that things are looking up on the "free" trade front, with French and German leaders declaring the TTIP "free" trade deal all but dead, and Congressional leaders saying they won't bring the TPP up for a vote during the lame-duck period. I think they're lying, of course -- they could attach its ratification to one of the many must-pass spending bills Congress will leave to the last minute. Still, breathe deep and consider that the only reason our leaders haven't rammed these "deals" through already is that the public opposes them, which is exactly how it's supposed to work, but too often doesn't. So Sum of Us helps you tell Our Glorious Elites to end the use of the "investor-state dispute settlement" (or ISDS) courts that "free" trade deals empower -- not only because they nullify our laws, enable pollution, and keep their rulings secret, but because they encourage corporations to shop around the world for trade-related problems that'll allow them to manufacture grievances with governments and extract taxpayer tribute. In other words, corporations use ISDS to file frivolous lawsuits.
Meanwhile, our government mandated stronger auto mileage standards back in 2012, and auto manufacturing corporations embraced them. But if you thought that seemed too good to be true, maybe you were on to something: the EPA and the NHTSA are now reviewing the standards, and some automaking corporations are pushing them to weaken them. So Consumers Union helps you tell our government to keep fuel efficiency standards strong. Upon hearing that seven in 10 Americans think auto mileage standards should be stronger, I imagined right-wingers advancing the argument that those three-in-10 who disagree are an aggrieved minority who should get veto power over the standards. Majority rule is not always the right thing to do -- if seven in 10 Americans decided that the other three-in-10 should be their slaves, we would not permit that, because that would oppress the three. But higher mileage standards, frankly, don't oppress three in 10 Americans -- not even if they feel "oppressed" by less pollution, less climate change, and lower health care costs.
Finally, if you've missed previous opportunities to tell your Congressfolk to pass H.R. 448/S. 217, the Women's Health Protection Act, then CREDO still helps you do that. The Women's Health Protection Act would essentially repeal all the state-level laws we've seen over the last five-plus years -- which include laws requiring medically unnecessary ultrasounds, absurd physical plant requirements for abortion clinics, unnecessary hospital-admission privileges for abortion practitioners -- that don't actually protect women's health or even reduce abortions, but merely harass women who seek an abortion. Women already approach the decision to end a pregnancy with a gravity that I, as a man, cannot even contemplate, and mandating all the extra hoops and guilt trips demonstrates a profound disrespect for women that is precisely the kind of childish thing a man should put behind him. And, please, withhold the "just don't have sex if you don't want to have a child" lecture. A man, certainly, should know better than to preach abstinence to anyone -- particularly if he's going to turn around and tell his buddies about his latest conquest.