The Democratic Platform drafting committee rejected amendments to oppose the TPP agreement [1] and to oppose the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. [2] The TPP is opposed by Secretary Clinton, Senator Sanders, the overwhelming majority of House Democrats, the labor movement, the climate justice movement, and groups concerned about access to essential medicines. The Sanders campaign and the pro-peace, pro-Israel lobby J Street [3] had asked the drafting committee to oppose settlement construction and expansion in the West Bank, which are a key obstacle to a diplomatic resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict. On Friday, the Obama Administration called on the Israeli government to stop expanding settlements in the West Bank. [4] In Orlando on July 8-9, the full platform committee will consider these issues again. [5] Urge the Democratic Platform Committee to oppose the TPP and to oppose settlement expansion in the West Bank by signing our petition. References: 1. https://www.thenation.com/article/the-democrats-draft-platform-doesnt-oppose-tpp-thats-bad-policy-and-bad-politics/ 2. http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.727025 3. http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000155-179d-dad1-a777-3f9dee560002 4. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-israel-palestinians-quartet-idUSKCN0ZH3QI 5. https://demconvention.com/platform/

Dear Mr. Schultz, As the largest coffee vendor in the world, Starbucks could be leading efforts to reduce waste in the food industry. You say you "are working to shrink [your] environmental footprint and meet the expectations of [your] customers by reducing the waste associated with [your] business, increasing recycling and promoting reusable cups," yet your company's routine practices suggest otherwise. Though you sell reusable cups and give a discount to customers who use them, I've seen no active promotion of this reward system in the many Starbucks I have visited. I've also discovered that bringing one's own cup is no guarantee that a disposable cup won't get wasted in the process. Your website claims that you "have learned that widespread behavior change is unlikely to be driven by one company alone" and that you "will continue to explore new ways to reduce [your] cup waste but ultimately it will be [the] customers who control whether or not [you] achieve continued growth in the number of beverages served in reusable cups." My own efforts to get you to address the waste inherent in your drip coffee system suggests that this claim is disingenuous. Customers like me, who order decaf in a large travel mug (even one purchased at Starbucks), have noticed that it is routine practice to use a disposable paper cup to catch the coffee before transferring it to a travel mug. Several efforts to head off this practice when I order have proven useless. I've also visited some franchises that sell travel mugs, but won't even sell you coffee in a reusable container. They say it's the law, yet another franchise 20 miles up the road makes no such claim. After three attempts over the last two years to get your company to address these relatively minor concerns, with absolutely no sign of progress, I have come to seriously doubt Starbucks' sincerity regarding waste reduction. Since I believe that Starbucks has the capacity make a real difference, I feel it's time to ask other Starbucks customers to let you know that this is not OK with them either. A company that earns $20 billion a year while adding 4 billion cups to the global waste stream could be doing a lot more to promote reuse, yet I see no evidence that you are interested in addressing even relatively small problems that would actually save you money. So, how can I expect more substantive measures, like offering real cups to those who aren't taking the coffee out in ALL franchises? You should be ashamed. I'm asking anyone who believes that waste reduction is everyone's responsibility to do the following until we see some sign that Starbucks is really listening: 1)Sign this petition to ask Starbucks to renew its commitment to promoting reuse both within its company and within its industry. 2) Share this message with friends and family. 3) Frequent locally owned coffee shops that serve coffee in real cups on premises and promote the use of reusable containers. If we don't lead the charge to stop letting convenience trump common sense, who will? Starbucks could be very influential in leading this effort, but first you have to commit to eliminating systemic waste and actively promote reuse. Can you hear me now? I hope so, because I really do like your coffee! Sincerely, Pat Blakeslee Advocate for Zero Waste

The North Carolina General Assembly is wasting taxpayer money to pay legal fees to defend HB2, a suit they have no real chance of winning, just to make a political point. They are using money from the disaster relief fund to pay for this. If North Carolina is hit with the kind of flooding that West Virginia and Texas have experienced, or, as we enter hurricane season, if a hurricane damages a community, the fund to help will be reduced by a half million dollars.

In Ohio, we limit to three the number of shotgun slugs a hunter can have in his or her rifle while deer hunting. Why in the world do we offer a better chance of survival to a deer than we do to a nightclub patron? First, as the author of this petition, I want to be clear about my position. I own a handgun and I support the right of other responsible people to also own handguns and sporting weapons. Furthermore, unlike most of the people who are vocal about their right to protect themselves with a gun, I've actually been in situations where I've used my gun for self protection—twice last summer alone, once when a man broke into our home in the middle of the night, and another time when I crossed paths with a feral hog at my farm. But for the life of me, I see no reason why anyone needs an assault-style weapon for self-protection. I get the attraction and enjoyment that some people find in owning these sorts of weapons They are a lot of fun. I also acknowledge that an assault weapons ban is an infringement against the majority of people who use them responsibly. But, dammit, I am so tired of seeing innocent children slaughtered by these weapons. Some people feel a better solution would be to arm everyone. I don't see that working. Not everyone wants to carry a gun, and not everyone wants to live in a world where they feel they need to do so in order to go about their daily affairs. They would prefer some common-sense alternative that would help keep assault-style weapons out of the hands of crazies, criminals, and terrorists. Furthermore, it's reckless to suggest that a gun is the best choice for folks who don't want to carry guns to begin with, who are afraid of them, and who wouldn't put the time in that's needed in order to be proficient in their use. I also know that both sides of this debate arrived at different conclusions about the effectiveness of the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. About the only thing that they agreed on was that it appeared to lower the incidents of mass shootings. That'll work. Is there a Constitutional issue here? That's a red herring, in my mind. As the Supreme Court has ruled a number of times, the Constitution is not a suicide pact, nor is it a device designed to assist mass murderers and terrorists. Of course an assault weapons ban isn't going to stop every instance of mass murder or every type of terrorist attack. Of course there needs to be more effort made to identify the people who truly intend to misuse these weapons to kill children and cut short promising lives. But it might help some. An assault weapons ban is not a perfect remedy, but it's an uneasy compromise I'll accept at this point if it helps keep just one more nut from causing mayhem at just one more elementary school. Addendum: Some people have contacted me to state that it's hard to define what an assault weapon is. Ultimately, that's a legislature's responsibility to define, but here's my suggestion for a starting point--an assault weapon is a firearm with a barrel length greater than 12 inches AND holding more than 11 rounds at a time AND able to fire 30 rounds or more within two minutes. If a firearm meets all three of these conditions, it's an assault weapon. If a firearm does not meet all three of these conditions, it's not an assault weapon.

I live in Oregon. The entire West coast is on fault lines, prime for earthquakes. Obama just approved 1,500 new oil fracking wells, which can contribute to this huge devastation. People living on the West coast are more important than oil.

This petition is to speak for all of the individuals that are simply trying to raise productive members of society. With all that's going on in the world, it is simply not fair to jail a 70 year old woman for whipping her grandchild, while police around the world are killing people with no consequence. It is time to take a stand!!!

A basic, centuries-old tenet of our justice system is that ignorance of the law is no defense. But Corporate America's puppets in Congress are trying to sneak language into much-needed criminal justice reform legislation so that executives can get away with breaking the law. CEOs would be able to evade prosecution by claiming they didn't know what the law required of them. As if it's not obvious they shouldn’t sell defective products or rip people off. It's great that Congress, in a bipartisan push, is at last tackling ineffective and discriminatory law enforcement policies that have thrown vast numbers of people in prison for low-level, nonviolent drug offenses — at last taking steps to address the crisis of over-criminalization and over-incarceration. But corporate crime inflicts a horrific toll on our society. And there are far too FEW — not too many — corporate criminal prosecutions. Tell Congress: Reject any attempt to create an "ignorance of the law" defense that makes it harder to prosecute corporate crime.

American civil liberties and my Constitutional rights are being threatened because political rhetoric cannot address a key social-environmental issue, namely the de facto subsidy of alcohol consumption. The CDC report at http://www.cdc.gov/features/costsofdrinking/ presents the facts at hand. guns & alcohol KILL cars & alcohol KILL pills & alcohol KILL sex & alcohol KILL What Is So Hard To Understand? Distributed Beverage Alcohol is simply not paying the social cost incurred by its distribution. This is a key social-environmental issue. There will be plenty of money to fund universal health care, public schools, judicial matters, police, parks, and infrastructure maintenance if the USA makes beverage alcohol pay its way in real dollars. This is no more to ask of drinkers and of the beverage alcohol industry than what voters have insisted smokers and tobacco companies pay for the damage caused by distributed tobacco products. The CDC estimates the real cost of drinking beverage alcohol to be $2.05 per serving. [see http://www.cdc.gov/features/costsofdrinking/ ] . To know this cost of use exists and yet to not tax it commensurately constitutes a de facto subsidy for public intoxication. This cruel absurdity is fostering violence, including gun violence. The States and the Federal Government share equally in this blind duplicity. A majority of gun violence in America, including domestic violence, is caused by alcohol intoxication. Consequently, taxing beverage alcohol use is gun control. This petition calls for the Federal Government to institute a $2 per serving excise tax on distributed beverage alcohol to be shared equally by the States and the Federal Government, and includes this caveat: If convicted of Driving Under the Influence, one loses their right to keep guns in their possession during that correctional period. Clearly, if you can not be trusted to drive a car, you cannot be trusted with an arsenal. Sex & alcohol are likewise a recipe for tragedy because intoxicated sex produces so many unintended pregnancies which lead to abortion. Americans have the right to drink alcohol and the right to use tobacco just as they have a Constitutional right to own guns. These options can co-exist if and only if each pays its own way. The governments do not have any obligation to subsidize these activities. However, any government concerned with public well being and sustainability is obligated to hold in check choices known to have a negative impact. Keep a simple fact in mind: A distributed beverage alcohol excise tax would be a tax no one has to pay because you have the right to make your own beverage alcohol or you can simply abstain. Taxing beverage alcohol use is gun control.

Just yesterday a horrible injustice was committed . A loving pet dog was brutally stabbed to death...Nothing was done to this person for this horrible heinous act! No fine, no court date , no slap on the wrist!!! It is an educated fact someone capable of such an atrocity is just as likely to commit such an act on a person, perhaps even a child. Animals have absolutely no voice and no defense up against morality, that is strictly the territory of humans. Numbers are growing more and more everyday, with reports of cruel and hate filled cases, and yet they go unpunished or given ridiculously low fines . Why does a living, feeling creature of God, innocent of a single sin endure gratuitous suffering devoid of reason and justification when we, as overseers to their dominion, could put laws into place to protect them from cruelty? Please help justice be served in this case as well as so many other animals that have died cruel and senseless deaths vulnerable to criminal aggression.

Limiting Gun Magazine Capacity (the number of bullets in a gun) will help to reduce the number of deaths in mass shootings and greatly help potential victims at a massacre to escape or stop the shooter.

The Cayadutta Creek, one of the most polluted streams in New York during much of the 20th Century, is now supporting trophy-sized brown trout in the lower portion of the stream below the sewage treatment plant to the Mohawk River (where NYS has not been stocking). These fish are now being threatened by overfishing and need to be protected by a "Catch and Release Only" zone.

Puerto Rico is in trouble, yes mostly because of bad government deals USA and Puerto Rico politicians, years of bad policies, mismanagement, excessive debt and kept hostage by Congress Its economy has been shrinking or stagnant for a decade and the unemployment rate sits at nearly 12 percent on the book but more than 40% after you take the government bad bookkeeping.. The commonwealth and its utilities have a debt of $73 billion, its public pension funds are woefully underfunded and the government could be forced to shut down soon. Lawmakers in Washington and San Juan are trying to come up with a plan that addresses the financial and economic problems of the territory, which is home to 3.6 million American citizens on the island and 4.4million scattered in the states. The island’s difficulties also affect investors in the 50 states who own the tax-exempt bonds issued by Puerto Rico’s government and utilities and of which they ripe great benefits all throughout these years. Now they want o collect all the eggs, problem is there are no more hens. Once a growing manufacturing center, Puerto Rico began a long decline in the mid-2000s after federal tax incentives for businesses that produced goods on the island were phased out, prompting many employers and tens of thousands of workers to leave, thanks to the USA Congress who took away the benefits Puerto Rican leaders made the situation worse by not investing sufficiently in the economy and by borrowing excessively, all by designed since the two parties are at a 50 year old war designed to make themselves rich and the heck with the people. Investors eagerly extended loans without properly analyzing the territory’s deteriorating financial health, so they took a risk which now they will not renegotiate, less provided a chapter 9 format. They did so in large part because interest earned from Puerto Rican government bonds is exempt from federal and state income taxes One of the biggest and most immediate problems for the island is the roughly $20 billion debt owed by three government-owned companies: the electricity utility, the water and sewer system and the highway authority. Because Puerto Rico is a territory, these businesses are not allowed to restructure their debt in Chapter 9 bankruptcies. Congress should approve a new bill that would allow these and other Puerto Rican government-owned companies, as well as municipalities, to use Chapter 9. Half the problem solved. Analysts and bankruptcy experts say that Congress should go even further and allow the government of Puerto Rico to file for bankruptcy. It is also argued that federal lawmakers should appoint a financial control board to oversee the island’s finances; this drastic step would be an act tyranny since Puerto Rico under the ELA \?USA agreement of self-determination was signed in the 50ties. Today may not be worth it paper and ink. There is a lot that can be done to revive Puerto Rico’s economy. The first order is to get the Congress to proclaim Puerto Rico and independent Nation as we are. Puertorricans, we the people, can build stronger efforts to boost tourism, manufacturing and the services sector through targeted public investments could lead to faster growth. We can exercise trade agreement with our Caribbean neighbors, Central and South American partners, as well as with the European Nations. The government could also improve its finances not by raising taxes, but by balancing tax revenue. Puerto Rico only collects about 11 percent of its gross domestic product in taxes, compared with the 33 percent average for advanced countries. Again fixing its finances is not sufficient, , Puerto Rico has to answer a bigger question about its future: Should it become a state, which in my mind the Gringos will never have. Should the government hold another voter referendum on the issue, hello its not worth the paper and effort used. Again Congress has the last standing word. Congress and President Obama budgeted $2.5 million for the territory to hold another referendum on its political status; Governor Padilla said last year his government will hold a vote by 2016, will never happen, and if it did it will amount o nothing. Puerto Rico is about 1,000 miles from Miami, but it can seem a world apart. And as a matter of fact it is a World apart, we have a different culture, we speak Spanish, we eat Rice and beans and fried chicken, we love the Spanish music and have some to the World best musicians artist and poets. The island’s financial problems are a reminder that benign neglect has had terrible consequences for millions of Puerto Ricans, as for American we are all Americans. To ease everybodys pain I Petition for Freedom