The sources of information people are exposed to are able to tell the story in their own way so it is imperative that the sources and funding of the information be made transparent in order to preserve the honesty of the news. More information about anyone involved in this process and their motivations only improves the value of the news.

"Citizen Koch" was pulled from a national public television broadcast because of fear of upsetting David Koch, who has been a major donor to public television. Public television stations answer to viewers and donors like me, and we deserve to know what our neighbors the Koch Brothers have been up to. Please join me in the call for a national broadcast of "Citizen Koch" on Independent Lens!

"Citizen Koch" was pulled from a national public broadcast because of fear of upsetting David Koch. This is not how PBS should operate. Join the call for a national broadcast of "Citizen Koch" on Independent Lens.

The sources of information people are exposed to are able to tell the story in their own way so it is imperative that the sources and funding of the information be made transparent in order to preserve the honesty of the news. More information about anyone involved in this process and their motivations only imporoves the value of the news.

Koch money shouldn't influence public television programming -- we want to see the film "Citizen Koch" aired on PBS! Public television should not be subjected to censorship by billionaires. Air the program "Citizen Koch!"

"Citizen Koch" was pulled from a national public television broadcast because of fear of upsetting David Koch, who has been a major donor to public television. But public television stations should answer to viewers like me, not to billionaires like the Koch brothers -- and I want to see this important documentary. Will you join the call for a national broadcast of "Citizen Koch" on Independent Lens?

Yelp.com, the popular social review site has joined the league of greedy corporations that is spreading dangerous conservative legislation nationwide. ALEC is the reason so many states have passed laws like “Voter I.D.” and “Stand Your Ground.”

The online reviewing company Yelp has joined the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. They have paid thousands of dollars to sit on ALEC's Civil Justice Task Force. Whether Yelp likes it or not, that money will be used to further all areas of ALEC's pro-corporate agenda, from voter suppression and union-busting to "Stand Your Ground" laws. More info here: http://bit.ly/YelpandALEC

WSSC water rates for PG and Mont. County residents (in Md.) have increased 60% in the last 6 years! (That's 7-10% each year during this recession.) WSSC Commissioners will soon be deciding on next year's increase. Please help us stop them from placing such an intolerable financial burden on Marylanders.

Like cigarette warnings from the Surgeon General, there should be ratings on stocks and mutual funds of lawbreaking companies. Investors need to know when they're about to support a company with a record of breaking the law and endangering the public and the economy.

Wall Street and the big banks engaged in predatory lending and pushed working families into mortgages they knew they couldn’t afford. The housing bubble and the subsequent foreclosure crisis, created by Wall Street, has destabilized communities and pummeled municipal budgets across New Jersey. We can no longer wait for action at the federal level to hold banks accountable. Our communities need to protect the public interest now. NJ Communities United is actively organizing homeowners in cities around the state to demand urgent action by local elected leaders to end the crisis, keep families in their homes and protect the public good of our struggling communities. Specifically, homeowners and advocates are urging New Jersey cities to pursue principle reduction strategies for homeowners whose mortgages are underwater - including the use of eminent domain. Historically, eminent domain has been used against working-class communities to make way for large development projects that profit investors and banks. Angry that this tool is being used against the banks, Wall Street predictably filed a lawsuit against the city of Richmond, CA calling the use of eminent domain “unconstitutional,” even though there are multiple court rulings that support its use in similar circumstances. We are certain that Richmond, CA – and other cities considering eminent domain – have the constitutional right to seize underwater mortgages from banks that are unwilling to work with homeowners. More than this, we believe in that the power of the people cannot be defeated! Thousands of homeowners are actively engaged in campaigns across the country to save their homes from greedy banks – and YOUR voice is central to this struggle! In solidarity, Trina Scordo NJ Communities United

PROPORTIONAL PUNISHMENTS are required for individual and corporate responsibility. Current law allows the worst offenders against humanity to pay minuscule fines instead of facing punishments that deter crimes. My proposed law would make responsibility paramount in every industry and act as a REAL deterrent to violations of regulations and laws. It would also make individual punishments equal by fining people a percentage of their wealth and not continue to have a system that allows unequal punishments for identical crimes. Deterrents to crimes are only effective if punishments are more just and equal, and based on the wealth of individuals and corporations. All people and corporations should face proportional punishments based on their wealth when they commit a crime, violate a regulation or violate any law. As an example, currently corporations violate regulations with impunity and consider fines as just another expense in conducting their business. Current punishments have zero detrimental effects on crimes for the very wealthy. If we used proportional punishments a corporation's first offense could be say 1% of their total wealth. A 2nd violation would increase the penalty to 5% and so on. Since corporations or the wealthy can only be forced to adhere to laws and regulations by hitting them in the only area that truly hurts them then proportional punishments would act as a perfect deterrent to their crimes. In another example, if a poor person gets a littering ticket any fines should be proportional to their net wealth, which if close to zero, the fine would be say $5. If a billionaire committed the same offense their penalty would be a proportional one based entirely on their wealth. If their wealth was $1 billion and the percentage of the fine was 1% then their resulting fine would be $10,000,000. I've seen warnings that if an individual poured even one can of used oil on the ground they can be fined up to $25,000 and face time in jail. Corporate executives do not face any repercussions when their corporations release toxins into our air, land or waters because they know government oversight is lax because of gutting of enforcement and lack of adequate laws that would deter such heinous acts. My proposed law would make personal & corporate responsibility a reality because only when the wealthiest face severe financial punishments corporate carnage against people and the environment will these crimes become less frequent. Since fines and punishments are supposed to be deterrents to violations of laws and regulations then the only way to enforce them fairly and equally is through proportional punishments. Financial punishments that are identical no matter what a person's or corporation's total wealth are currently ignored. The current system is regressive and punishments only truly affect the poorest in society. Fining an unemployed person $200 & a billionaire $200 isn't equality under the law. It's a regressive punishment which can devastate the poorest. The wealthy couldn't care less if they receive a $200 fine. It doesn't provide a penny of deterrent. To make proportional punishments even more effective corporate fines should be also paid by the entire executive level of corporations and their boards of directors. Currently, CEOs, CFOs, COOs and the like suffer no punishments for the unlawful actions by the corporations they run. Fines against corporations now are merely added on to the cost of products corporations make so we the cunsumer pay 100% of a corporation's wrongdoing while the poorest individuals pay 100% of any fine they receive. Individuals cannot pass on fines as expenses to others. Corporate executives should be forced to pay a percentage of their personal wealth in addition to any corporate fines. If an executive presiding over a corporation has a net wealth of $100 million and their corporation violates a regulation or law they should face the identical punishments based on a percentage of their wealth. If a corporation has commited multiple offenses and the proportional punishment percentage has risen to 10%, the the CEO with a net worth of $100 million would be forced to pay a fine of $10,000,000.00. Only then would a corporate executive act responsibly to have his corporation adhere to the law. Except in a minuscule number of cases corporate executives are 100% protected from any financial punishments no matter how heinous the acts of the corporations they lead. Executives are fully aware that they don't have to have any personal responsibility because they are insulated from ramifications of any offenses they or their corporations commit. To have a fair & equitable deterrent to violations of regulations and laws THAT HAS TO CHANGE. Currently, if a corporation has 20 violations of regulations or laws executives are often rewarded with even greater salaries and perks. Executives benefit from a defective system by willfully violating laws knowing they will suffer zero consequences. Until we have PROPORTIONAL PUNISHMENTS our country will continue to deteriorate because the worst offenders are shielded and all fines are paid for by the customers of any corporation. We must force executives who benefit from willful violations of regulations and laws to be held personally responsible, and in addition, corporations must also face financial punishments that increase with each infraction. The proportional punishment law I am proposing doesn't affect any other laws or regulations. The punishments I am advocating are in addition to all existing laws. Anyone who is opposed to my proposal is in effect against corporate & personal responsibility and opposed to equitable punishment under the law.