Big Agriculture companies have invested huge amounts of money to prevent originators of food from being legally required to disclose whether that food contains genetically modified ingredients. Why do consumers want to know if their food contains GMO ingredients? Because the long term safety -- and even the short term safety -- of Genetic Modification is not established -- and worse -- there are studies in European countries that it definitely is NOT safe. Monsanto and other companies invested in Genetic modification want the right to experiment on consumers without their consent or knowledge -- and with no risk of liability! Connecticut just overcame corporate opposition and passed a law requiring that GMO content be disclosed. We can do that in New Mexico also. Grandes empresas de agricultura han invertido enormes cantidades de dinero para evitar que los originadores de alimentos están legalmente obligados a revelar si el alimento contiene ingredientes genéticamente modificados. ¿Por qué los consumidores quieren saber si sus alimentos contienen ingredientes transgénicos? Porque no se establecieron la seguridad a largo plazo--y ni siquiera la seguridad a corto plazo - de modificación genética, y peor, existen estudios en los países europeos que definitivamente no es seguro. Monsanto y otras empresas que invierten en la modificación genética quieren el derecho a experimentar con los consumidores sin su consentimiento o conocimiento--y sin riesgo de responsabilidad! Connecticut sólo superó la oposición empresarial y aprobó una ley que requiere que se revelen el contenido de OGM. También podemos hacer eso en Nuevo México.

Label genetically modified organisms in our food.

Broomfield, CO-based federal grantee EAGLE-Net has, in the last two years: a) blown through some $93 million of its $100.6 million grant and has less than 40 paying customers (of a promised 230) b) cannot account for $25 million of the grant c) is trying to "sell" the taxpayer-financed network for $8 million and its not clear that they have any takers even at that price and d) provides service to only a very small handful of Colorado's rural school districts. Where did all the money go? Most of the $100.6 million in taxpayer money went to the construction contractor for the project, multinational corporate giant, G4S, headquartered in the UK (not Colorado, not even the US). G4S is also the corporate parent of operators of private prisons and alleged human rights abusers. Leading the charge to investigate EAGLE-Net’s alleged taxpayer rip-off are the four (4) Republican members of the Colorado Congressional delegation to the US House of Representatives, NOT the five (5) progressive Democrats in the US House and Senate. Despite many letters, communications and petitions from constituents, communities and civic organizations across rural Colorado, Democrats in the Colorado congressional delegation consistently refuse to support any investigation into alleged fraud, waste and abuse in EAGLE-Net's $100.6 million rural broadband grant. Please sign the petition calling on Senators Bennet and Udall, Representatives Polis, DeGette and Perlmutter to join their Republican colleagues Representatives Garner, Tipton, Lamborn and Coffman in supporting a non-partisan, independent investigation by US Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritkzer, the General Accounting Office (GAO) and the US Senate (Request for an oversight hearing) into EAGLE-Net's alleged misuse of $100.6 million in taxpayer dollars 2011 through 2013. The failure of the EAGLE-Net grant means hundreds of thousands of Colorado school kids are denied access to 21st century online learning tools. Fraud, waste, non-transparency, non-compliance, lack of oversight and blatant abuse in federal spending are NOT partisan issues.

Elizabeth Warren introduced a new Glass-Steagall bill to stop Wall Street banks from gambling with the life savings of regular families. It will also help prevent future bailouts. Sign the petition, which we'll deliver to Congress. (And, watch Elizabeth Warren talk about this petition on MSNBC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyRR-PsmPFM)

Prior geothermal activity in the Pohoiki area of the Island of Hawai`i has caused serious community harm, resulting in successful lawsuits by more than 100 residents. Hawaii Electric Light Company's present effort to contract for new geothermal development without considering the community's concerns is unreasonable and should be stopped. For further information please visit http://punapono.com/index.php/save

We are not science experiments to Monsanto

Walmart is considering opening three stores in Washington, D.C., but now the Washington Post is reporting that Walmart execs are telling the D.C. Council they will abandon plans for all three stores if the Council passes a living wage so that workers get a fair salary of $12.50 an hour. (Here's the Post story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/wal-mart-says-it-will-pull-out-of-dc-plans-should-city-mandate-living-wage/2013/07/09/4fa7e710-e8d0-11e2-a301-ea5a8116d211_story.html) $12.50 an hour is only $26,000 a year for a full-time worker -- barely enough to be called a living wage in a city as expensive Washington D.C., but apparently Walmart thinks even that paltry wage is too high. To each their own, I guess, but now Walmart is now trying to throw its weight around and intimidate D.C. Council members in order to prevent the living wage from passing for any workers in the city. That's outrageous, and the Council shouldn't allow fair wages for workers to be held hostage by Walmart. If Walmart doesn't want to pay workers a fair wage, then they should take their stores elsewhere.

WE THE PEOPLE Demand THAT all of the $100 billion in annual business (give aways) subsidies be revoked and all Tax breaks for both exporting jobs, and Hiring overseas for Jobs in America be recinded !

unlimited, often secret spending from billionaires and multinational corporations has been a disaster. If we do not act, money wil continue to inundate our elections and overwhelm the voices of voters. This corrosive system can result in a government for the highest bidder, rather than of, by, and for the people.

WHEREAS the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement ( hereinafter referred to as TPP) is being negotiated in secret as a “trade agreement” while 24 of the 26 chapters are about new enforceable corporate rights and privileges and restraints on government regulations on drug patent monopolies affecting the price of HIV/AIDS drugs among others, on the offshoring of jobs, on the preservation of natural resources, and on financial services, land use, food safety, energy, tobacco and threats to internet freedom; AND WHEREAS these new rules will be enforced through trade sanctions enforced by corporate –appointed tribunals which will have the power to sue the US government and other governments for compensation for losses caused by enforcement of financial, health, environmental, land use and other laws which they deem to have caused them financial loss; AND WHEREAS after Obama’s election US trade officials were instructed to withdraw from the TPP negotiations launched by President Bush and instead to sort out a new approach to trade which would fix the NAFTA model and prevent the corporate control of international trade of which TPP is an extreme example;

Congressman Daines recently accepted a $10,000 contribution from Citizens United for his 2014 campaign. Last November, in the same election that Montana voters sent Steve Daines to Congress, Montanans called on our elected officials to overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision when we passed Initiative 166 with 75% of the vote. But instead of heeding the will of the voters, Daines is aligning himself with the very group leading the assault on our clean election laws. Please join me in demanding that Congressman Daines return the Citizens United money.

Genetically modified food is controversial. Many scientists reveal multiple studies showing its harm. We demand the right to choose which food we eat by demanding that the Maryland General Assembly pass a labeling law. Los comestibles genéticamente modificados son polémicos. Muchos científicos han revelado múltiples estudios que demuestran su peligro. Exigimos el derecho a elegir lo que comamos exigiéndole a la Asamblea General de Maryland que aprueben una ley de etiquetación.