## THE MORAL AND FISCAL CASE FOR A DISABILITY LIVING WAGE The current Social Security Disability system is built on an inherently flawed "pay-to-play" model. By basing monthly payments on prior work history and "work credits," the government effectively penalizes those who become disabled at a young age. These individuals never had the chronological opportunity to build a career or pay into the system, yet they are forced to survive on significantly less support than those injured later in life. This creates a systemic "youth penalty" that traps our most vulnerable citizens in a cycle of lifelong poverty. The financial logic of the current system is also deeply counterproductive. When disability payments fall below the actual cost of living, individuals are often forced into state-funded nursing homes or long-term care facilities. These institutions cost taxpayers significantly more than a direct living wage would. By providing a livable income, we allow people to live independently in their communities, which is not only more humane but a far more responsible use of public funds. Beyond the financial savings, a living wage provides the foundation for true autonomy. Those disabled early in life lack the 401(k)s, home equity, or personal savings that older adults may have accumulated. A guaranteed living wage levels the playing field, ensuring that a person’s ability to afford food, accessible housing, and medical necessities is based on their human dignity rather than their previous tax contributions. Providing a living wage also acts as a direct stimulus to local economies. Unlike high earners who may save or invest their income, disabled individuals living on a fixed budget spend their benefits immediately on essential local goods and services like groceries, rent, and healthcare. This keeps wealth circulating within the community and supports small businesses, turning a social safety net into an engine for local economic stability. Ultimately, America must decide if its disability program is an insurance policy for the lucky or a safety net for all. We demand that Congress eliminate the work-credit requirement for those with permanent disabilities and establish a universal benefit floor that meets the modern cost of living. It is time to end the administrative complexity of the current tiers and replace them with a simple, dignified, and livable standard for every permanently disabled American.

THE HIDDEN RISKS OF HB5511 (The “Safety Paradox”) Lawmakers are presenting HB5511 as a way to protect children from the harmful parts of the internet. But by moving age verification into your phone’s software and app stores, this bill creates a dangerous paradox: The “safety” system itself may put your family at risk. 1. Why this is a major change for your family Right now, you access the internet directly. Under HB5511, your phone or computer becomes a digital checkpoint. Companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft become the gatekeepers. Access to apps and some websites would increasingly depend on your device confirming your age. If the system fails, or if a website can’t support it, access may be restricted or blocked. 2. Your identity becomes a target This system depends on tying age verification to your device or account. That could involve sharing sensitive information such as government ID, financial data, or other personal details. That creates new risks: ● Identity Theft Concentrating sensitive data across large platforms increases the potential impact of breaches and leaks. ● Sophisticated Scams As identity checks become more common, it becomes easier for criminals to imitate them and trick people into handing over personal information. 3. How this could put children at risk This system is meant to protect children, but it may also expose them to new risks. ● More data about children Children may need accounts tied to their age, creating larger digital footprints earlier in life. ● Connected systems When devices, accounts, and users are linked, it creates the potential to connect activity across home devices, school-issued laptops, and shared computers. ● Not fully effective At the same time, experience shows that age checks are often bypassed—meaning more data is collected without fully solving the problem. 4. The shift away from an open internet The internet today is open by default. Under this model, access increasingly depends on verification through corporate-controlled systems. That is a fundamental shift. From open access → to permission-based access. And once built into devices and law, it becomes very difficult to reverse. ⚠️ URGENCY: WHY THIS MATTERS NOW Current Status: HB5511 has passed the Illinois House and is now moving to the Illinois Senate for consideration. This is the moment when changes can still be made. Once systems like this are written into law and built into technology, they are extremely difficult to undo. If the device-level requirements are not addressed now, they may become permanent.

While sales continue, Caltrans is still able to proceed with suspicious pricing, aggressive contract negotiations, and a myriad of building code and health and safety code violations. Without intervention, these serious problems will be inherited by disadvantaged home buyers, and the costs and risks ultimately transferred to the cities and districts in which these homes are located.  Caltrans tenants feel that they are under duress. There is widespread confusion about the manner in which the law and the regulations are being applied by Caltrans and their real estate contractor, Veterans Realty Group. There is a lack of uniform, accurate information, and an immediate need for advocacy and legal aid. 

Many CSRS retirees leave Virginia because other states do not discriminate against CSRS employees. Why does Virginia discriminate against us?  Please consider changing this tax code, allowing CSRS retirees to enjoy the same benefits that every other retiree in Virginia is afforded.

Signing this petition is a way to stand up for basic human rights and demand accountability where it has been repeatedly ignored. Trousdale Turner Correctional Center has a well-documented history of violence, deaths, and unsafe conditions, yet little meaningful change has been made. By adding your name, you are helping bring attention to a serious issue that affects not only those incarcerated, but also their families, staff, and the broader community. Every signature increases pressure on officials to take action, whether that means shutting the facility down or enforcing immediate reforms. Change only happens when people speak out, and your voice can help protect lives and ensure that no one is forced to live or work in such dangerous conditions.

It protects children from harm and unnecessary separation Children need safety—but they also need love, stability, and connection to their family. When kids are removed without clear danger or placed with strangers instead of relatives, it can cause emotional trauma. This act makes sure removal only happens when truly necessary. 👨‍👩‍👧 It keeps families together when it’s safe By requiring kinship placement first, the act helps children stay with grandparents, aunts, uncles, or close family friends instead of entering foster care with strangers. That means less trauma and stronger emotional support. ⚖️ It gives parents basic fairness and rights Many parents feel shut out of the process. This act ensures they: • Know what they’re being accused of • Can see the evidence • Can attend hearings and defend themselves That’s not extra—it’s basic due process. 🎥 It brings transparency to the system With recordings and documentation, there is: • Less room for false claims or misunderstandings • More accountability for caseworkers • Clear evidence for courts When systems are transparent, they are more fair. 🏠 It makes foster care safer Not every foster placement is equal. This act strengthens: • Background checks • Drug screening • Mental health evaluations • Ongoing monitoring So children are placed in safe, stable homes. 🩺 It prevents unqualified decisions about children Decisions about a child’s mental or physical health can shape their entire future. This act ensures only licensed professionals can make those calls—protecting children from harmful or incorrect evaluations. 🔍 It holds the system accountable Without oversight, mistakes can go unchecked. This act creates independent review, so: • Complaints are investigated • Wrong decisions can be corrected • Families have a voice ❤️ It restores trust Right now, many families don’t trust the system meant to help them. This act sends a message: “The system should protect children and respect families—not work against them.”

Background The growth of artificial intelligence (AI) is driving rapid expansion of in data infrastructures, including hyperscale data centers and data center campuses, fossil fuel power plants, and transmission lines. Data centers consume vast amounts of water and power and are expected to cost Georgia residents $2.5 billion in tax breaks in 2027 alone. The Public Service Commission (PSC) recently approved Georgia Power's request for 10GW of additional natural gas power generation, despite data centers only having made 3GW worth of power commitments. In fact, Georgia Power's demand estimates only have a 1 in 500 chance of realizing, almost guaranteeing that Georgia residents will bear the cost of power expansions via rate increases down the road. Adding insult to injury, long-term job creation is limited at best and one of the major AI companies driving data center expansion says a white-collar Great Recession is not off the table. Recent research suggests that data centers create miles-wide heat islands and emit dangerous levels of infrasound, sound waves that fall below the range of human hearing but have a broad range of health impacts. Research on potential health and environmental effects is often overlooked, begging the question: What other harms of data center development will we discover after it's too late?

HB211 in Louisiana would criminalize homelessness, imposing penalties and mandated “homelessness courts” instead of providing access to housing or supportive services. Such measures do not address the root causes of homelessness and further destabilize vulnerable individuals. We must prioritize housing-first solutions and comprehensive support rather than punitive policies.

Rodney Dutch has served over 28 years in prison for a robbery—yet he was recently denied parole and given four more years, despite doing everything required to rehabilitate himself. This campaign is about more than one man—it’s about fairness, accountability, and a justice system that honors rehabilitation. Under the New Jersey Parole Act of 1979, individuals are supposed to be granted parole unless there is clear evidence they pose a risk. When that standard is not applied fairly, it affects everyone. By joining this campaign, you are: *Standing up against excessive sentencing *Supporting second chances and true rehabilitation giving a voice to families impacted by long-term incarceration *Helping hold the New Jersey State Parole Board accountable to the law. Your signature is more than support—it’s a statement that justice should be fair, consistent, and humane. Together, we can push for the second chance Rodney has earned.

People living with severe mental illness (SMI) and the families who love them are already heavily impacted by criminalization, as well as overrepresented in jails and prisons. SB1055 Arizona is a proposed legislation that exposes the intersection of disability in/justice, criminalization, failed mental health systems and racial profiling. SB1055 would isolate, humiliate, and control people into walking around with multiple forms of ID to either prove "we are not them" or to limit people's movements, erode their peace of mind, and terrorize all SMI families wherever they go (school, work, etc.) Justice-minded SMI caregivers in Arizona know that legislation like SB1055 is not only bad for Arizona, it's also bad for the rest of the country. Please sign our petition to stand in solidarity with SMI caregivers in Arizona!

This isn’t just about one student or one outfit—it’s about how our children are treated in their learning environment.  Students, especially young girls, are being singled out, embarrassed, and pulled out of class for wearing clothing that is widely considered normal and appropriate. Instead of focusing on their education, they are being taught that their bodies are a distraction and something to be monitored.  Dress code violations like this can impact confidence, self-esteem, and a student’s sense of belonging at school. It sends the message that how they look matters more than their ability to learn, participate, and grow.    These policies are often vague and inconsistently enforced, which can lead to unfair treatment and unnecessary disciplinary action. No student should lose instructional time or feel ashamed over clothing that is comfortable, functional, and appropriate.    This is about creating a school environment where students feel respected, supported, and focused on what truly matters—their education.    If we don’t speak up, nothing changes. 

The district Camp Chloe resides in, is currently overseen by councilman Mark Squilla, who has maintained councilmanic prerogative to the detriment of the residents. Meaning, he will continually back property owners, shareholders and developers needs over the needs of a vulnerable community of his constituents.  When asked to stop the most recent sweep, Mark Squilla told organizers that 'he doesn't have councilmanic prerogative over this land' which is absolutely not true. He has not been available for further comment, though the sweep was deterred by on the ground efforts of supporters and organizers.    Cherelle Parker has not made any comment about Camp Chloe, but we have heard from her office, that the needs and demands of the residents have been 'noted'.  As of 3/23, Cherelle Parker and Mark Squilla held a press conference announcing a new shelter opening up in the city, calling it a 'solution, not a shelter'.  But a solution for whom?  Funding for housing has been cut across the country. Abandoned houses rot throughout Philadelphia, seldom being repurposed into affordable housing. Rent is skyrocketing. Federal funding for social security, food stamps, and general assistance is being cut.  When this happens, the homeless population grows. Is the Mayor suggesting, with Mark Squilla standing directly behind her, that the 'solution' to losing your house, is to be indefinitely admitted into a shelter?  Is the suggestion that shelters offer more stability? Instead of curbing autonomy as we know them to do?  It is odd to offer shelters as a 'solution', to 'solve homelessness', in a city where the amount of vacant houses more than TRIPLES the amount of residents it has experiencing homelessness.  Without investing in more permanent, supportive housing, WHEN are you supposed to leave the shelter? WHERE are you supposed to go once you're out if there's no voucher and you can't afford rent? Philadelphia has more expensive transportation, groceries, and utilities than the national average. HOW are shelter systems helping offset these expenses for individuals who hope to graduate from them? HOW can one meaningfully save for an affordable future when the funding is only being spent on interim shelters?  Now you're starting to see what the residents of Camp Chloe have seen for a long time.  We demand a stop to the forced removal of the residents of Camp Chloe.  We demand negotiations instead of coercion into shelters.