We have applied to charter our proposed school for 5 years. The State keeps turning us down. Why?!

Saudi Arabia has used US-made cluster munitions in civilian areas in Yemen, leaving behind unexploded submunitions, Human Rights Watch reports. HRW is calling on the US to end its production and transfer of cluster munitions to conform with the widely accepted international ban on these weapons. [1] More than 100 nations have joined the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which prohibits all use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions due to the unacceptable harm they cause to civilians. Cluster munitions have wide area effects without distinction between civilians and combatants. Cluster munitions leave behind unexploded ordnance that can kill and injure civilians and obstruct economic and social development for decades after use. [2] US law prohibits recipients of US cluster munitions from using them in civilian areas. But Saudi Arabia has used US cluster munitions in civilian areas of Yemen, killing and wounding civilians. US law also bars the export of cluster munitions if more than 1% of the weapons’ submunitions fail to explode upon impact. But a Human Rights Watch report shows CBU-105 Sensor Fuzed Weapons, manufactured by US company Textron and used by Saudi Arabia in Yemen, delivered submunitions that failed to explode. [3] Urge your Representative to support any amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act which would end or limit the production or transfer of cluster bombs by signing our petition. References: 1. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/05/06/yemen-saudis-using-us-cluster-munitions 2. http://www.clusterconvention.org/ 3. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/05/06/dispatch-us-contradictions-landmines-and-cluster-munitions

At a Hillary Clinton rally on March 31, the presidential candidate lost her patience with a young Greenpeace activist, who thanked Clinton for her commitment to climate change and then asked her whether she'll reject fossil-fuel money. Pointing her finger at the activist, Secretary Clinton said she was "so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me." The reason Clinton was asked this question wasn’t because of a lying Bernie Sanders, but because of her own political record. Here are some facts: Clinton’s official campaign agenda supports new fracking and other fossil-fuel projects in the United States and around the world. Unlike Sanders, Clinton has not signed the Fix Democracy pledge which rejects fossil-fuel money. Eleven lobbyists who represent fossil-fuel companies have bundled $1.4 million for the Clinton campaign. Three of the lobbyists primarily represent fossil-fuel companies, and two more exclusively represent fossil-fuel companies: one is a Cheniere Energy lobbyist, and one an ExxonMobil lobbyist. Hedge-fund and private-equity financiers who have billions of dollars at stake in the fossil-fuel industry are investing millions of dollars in Clinton's campaign. Of course, the vast preponderance of fossil-fuel money is invested in Republicans, the party of climate denial. There are many committed climate and clean-energy activists who are strong and influential Clinton supporters. But global warming isn’t going to stop until we stop burning fossil fuels. We need to divest and invest: to redirect all—not just some—of the billions financing the fossil-fuel industry into financing a clean, just national infrastructure. Now, state attorneys general are investigating ExxonMobil’s climate deception and scientists are revealing the true climate costs of methane leakage. The fracking boom and bust has left millions of American workers and their families in dire economic straits and frightening health consequences. The time is right for the Democratic Party to cut ties to oil lobbyists and fracking financiers. For that to happen, political leaders need to take action. Hillary Clinton says that climate change is “an urgent threat and a defining challenge of our time,” and that she is committed to making the United States the “world’s clean energy superpower.” Clinton can show strong climate leadership by taking a clear stand against the dirty fossil-fuel interests investing in climate destruction. The language of the Fix Democracy pledge: "I pledge allegiance to a democracy of, by, and for the people. If elected, I pledge to fight for a people-powered democracy where every voice is heard by defending the right to vote for all, and supporting common-sense measures like public funding for campaigns and overturning Citizens United to ensure a government by and for the people, not the biggest donors. And I will prove that I work for the people by refusing money from fossil fuel interests and by championing these solutions for a people powered democracy on the campaign trail."

Because voting is a fundamental right of all Americans.

The proposed gun range would bring significant noise pollution, crush property values and destroy our quality of life. There would be no meaningful economic benefit from having a shooting range in Town.

A group of volunteers with no political affiliations organized as Williamson Strong to monitor and be advocates for good schools. They are being persecuted and fined in a tragically unfair, politically motivated action by the Tennessee Registry Office to classify them incorrectly as a PAC. Please investigate the matter to protect these good people, our schools and the very integrity of the TN Registry Office. If this interpretation is allowed, no group that speaks against an issue or politician will be permitted without creating a PAC.

Because i have worked with victims of drug abuse in northeast Montana for many years, I see there is a need for an organization like this, as many children are lost in a system that is overburdened with these types of problems.

There are already enough bullies in the lunchroom. Now some members of the U.S. House are effectively trying to take our kids’ lunch money -- by putting forward a bill that guts school lunch programs. An ill-advised update to the Child Nutrition Act came out late last month that jeopardizes free and reduced school lunch for millions of children. This legislation is moving quickly, and we need to stop the provisions that could lead to empty stomachs from coast to coast. Taking away kids’ school lunches is being hailed as the fiscally responsible thing to do, even when we know the opposite is true. When students are hungry they can’t learn. Providing lunch to children whose families are struggling with food insecurity is a simple investment to make sure that those children are learning. It’s just common sense. The House Child Nutrition Reauthorization Bill includes sneaky provisions that would gut the school lunch program -- and would roll back years of progress. [1] If passed, more than 7,000 schools would have their school lunch eligibility revoked. And those more than 7,000 schools? They serve more than 3 million kids [2] Rep. Luke Messer is a member of the critical House Education and Workforce Committee which will be taking a look at this language over the next week or so. It is critical that he hears that we must protect hungry kids, not take away their lunches. [1] http://goo.gl/I85mAI [2] http://goo.gl/YU5Z7I

There are already enough bullies in the lunchroom. Now some members of the U.S. House are effectively trying to take our kids' lunch money -- by putting forward a bill that guts school lunch programs. An ill-advised update to the Child Nutrition Act came out late last month that jeopardizes free and reduced school lunch for millions of children. This legislation is moving quickly, and we need to stop the provisions that could lead to empty stomachs from coast to coast. Taking away kids' school lunches is being hailed as the fiscally responsible thing to do, even when we know the opposite is true. When students are hungry they can’t learn. Providing lunch to children whose families are struggling with food insecurity is a simple investment to make sure that those children are learning. It's just common sense. The House Child Nutrition Reauthorization Bill includes sneaky provisions that would gut the school lunch program -- and would roll back years of progress. [1] If passed, more than 7,000 schools would have their school lunch eligibility revoked. And those more than 7,000 schools? They serve more than 3 million kids [2] Rep. Lou Barletta is a member of the critical House Education and Workforce Committee which will be taking a look at this language over the next week or so. It is critical that he hears that we must protect hungry kids, not take away their lunches. [1] http://goo.gl/I85mAI [2] http://goo.gl/YU5Z7I

There are already enough bullies in the lunchroom. Now some members of the U.S. House are effectively trying to take our kids' lunch money -- by putting forward a bill that guts school lunch programs. An ill-advised update to the Child Nutrition Act came out late last month that jeopardizes free and reduced school lunch for millions of children. This legislation is moving quickly, and we need to stop the provisions that could lead to empty stomachs from coast to coast. Taking away kids' school lunches is being hailed as the fiscally responsible thing to do, even when we know the opposite is true. When students are hungry they can’t learn. Providing lunch to children whose families are struggling with food insecurity is a simple investment to make sure that those children are learning. It's just common sense. The House Child Nutrition Reauthorization Bill includes sneaky provisions that would gut the school lunch program -- and would roll back years of progress. [1] If passed, more than 7,000 schools would have their school lunch eligibility revoked. And those more than 7,000 schools? They serve more than 3 million kids [2] Rep. Brett Guthrie is a member of the critical House Education and Workforce Committee which will be taking a look at this language over the next week or so. It is critical that he hears that we must protect hungry kids, not take away their lunches. [1] http://goo.gl/I85mAI [2] http://goo.gl/YU5Z7I

There are already enough bullies in the lunchroom. Now some members of the U.S. House are effectively trying to take our kids’ lunch money -- by putting forward a bill that guts school lunch programs. An ill-advised update to the Child Nutrition Act came out late last month that jeopardizes free and reduced school lunch for millions of children. This legislation is moving quickly, and we need to stop the provisions that could lead to empty stomachs from coast to coast. Taking away kids’ school lunches is being hailed as the fiscally responsible thing to do, even when we know the opposite is true. When students are hungry they can’t learn. Providing lunch to children whose families are struggling with food insecurity is a simple investment to make sure that those children are learning. It’s just common sense. The House Child Nutrition Reauthorization Bill includes sneaky provisions that would gut the school lunch program -- and would roll back years of progress. [1] If passed, more than 7,000 schools would have their school lunch eligibility revoked. And those more than 7,000 schools? They serve more than 3 million kids [2] Rep. David Roe is a member of the critical House Education and Workforce Committee which will be taking a look at this language over the next week or so. It is critical that he hears that we must protect hungry kids, not take away their lunches. [1] http://goo.gl/I85mAI [2] http://goo.gl/YU5Z7I

There are already enough bullies in the lunchroom. Now some members of the U.S. House are effectively trying to take our kids’ lunch money -- by putting forward a bill that guts school lunch programs. An ill-advised update to the Child Nutrition Act came out late last month that jeopardizes free and reduced school lunch for millions of children. This legislation is moving quickly, and we need to stop the provisions that could lead to empty stomachs from coast to coast. Taking away kids’ school lunches is being hailed as the fiscally responsible thing to do, even when we know the opposite is true. When students are hungry they can’t learn. Providing lunch to children whose families are struggling with food insecurity is a simple investment to make sure that those children are learning. It’s just common sense. The House Child Nutrition Reauthorization Bill includes sneaky provisions that would gut the school lunch program -- and would roll back years of progress. [1] If passed, more than 7,000 schools would have their school lunch eligibility revoked. And those more than 7,000 schools? They serve more than 3 million kids [2] Rep. Matt Salmon is a member of the critical House Education and Workforce Committee which will be taking a look at this language over the next week or so. It is critical that he hears that we must protect hungry kids, not take away their lunches. [1] http://goo.gl/I85mAI [2] http://goo.gl/YU5Z7I