This is a proposal to extend relief to homeowners with underwater loans that may otherwise be qualified to purchase a new or different home. This program would include a one time tax write off deductible over a ten year period, in equal portions per year for the sale of a single family primary residence. I have been stuck in a home far underwater for 7 years, but am otherwise qualified to purchase a different home if there were a way to write off the loss of the underwater amount in the event of a sale. This order is an affront to the banks and the Congress who have empowered the banks to write off ALL of their costs for homes they hold in inventory that were once the homes of families that have not been able to write off any portion of their losses. The banks have ALL of the benefits that should belong to the victims of the Housing bubble debacle, in that the families cannot get one penny of relief for their losses. This will get the real estate market going by unleashing market forces allowing bank held inventory to rapidly adjust to mark-to-market pricing instead of mark-to-prior-sale pricing. Real estate sales is a primary generator of economic strength and results in huge job creation. By unlocking the portion of the economy now being held by the Banks within the spread between their pricing and fair market pricing, billions of dollars will enter the economy and generate jobs. Congress is dysfunctionally unable to enact something similar because of politically sectarian gridlock. The Banks will never willingly mark-to-market because the ability to write off the artificially higher prices gives them a greater benefit than doing the right thing.

School massacres must end. The NRA says 'arm everybody.' Legislators want tighter restrictions on assault weapons, magazines or ammunition. Why not make our children's classrooms safer instead. Most have been constructed of cement block already, so solid core or steel doors with magnetic locks could make them virtually impenetrable. External lock-down from the principle's office or a card swipe from within the classroom could prevent the bloodshed and death like we've seen in our schoolhouse shootings

Many seniors rely on SS to pay their expenses. Expenses keep going up and if SS is cut, this will effect the well being of elderly who cannot work and have no other income. This is not socialism, this is common decency, aka humanistic values. Other civilized countries are keeping theirs. Lets not give in to extremists. Dems won.

Taxes, the deficit and entitlement reform.

Taxes, the deficit and entitlement reform.

With the rash of violence in recent times my petition is for the control of guns in United States.

Although very fortunately I have not been effected by the unemployment crisis in this country like so many other Americans I haven't heard that anyone has raised the question about waiving any early withdrawal penalties for people who have no other savings to fall back on other than a retirement account and have to use that money to pay their bills. It certainly only seems fair to give people in this situation a break on that. I'd like to know if this issue has been raised by anyone else, and if so I would certainly support it.

President Obama can clearly demonstrate to the world that he is just, fair, and the clear-headed mature leader of the free world by inviting congressional leaders to a negotiating meeting to decide on the Fiscal Cliff, with full press coverage allowed, on the condition that no one leaves the room until an acceptable deal is achieved while viewed by the entire world

All gun owners claim that they are responsible, and all guns are initially purchased from manufacturers through legal means. Yet over 31 thousand people die in the US each year of gun-related injuries, and at least twice that many receive non-fatal injuries. In addition to the horror, pain and loss of loved ones, these incidents are estimated to generate over $100BN in economic damage each and every year. Given the difficulties of controlling firearms through regulatory means, it is unreasonable to assume that meaningful public policies aimed at reducing the risk posed to Americans by the 300 million-plus guns currently in circulation in the US will be successful. Other means must be considered. Liability insurance is one of the oldest and most well-instantiated means that society has of managing the risk that one person’s private property or behavior may pose to others, or to society at large. Most states, for example, recognize that motor vehicles have the potential to cause harm to others, and that many vehicle-owners do not have the financial means to reimburse others for damage caused by accidents, and therefore require it for use of public roads. It is also required for many kinds of commercial activity in which a mishap might harm innocent people – restaurants and other public accommodations, transportation services, industrial facilities are but a few examples in which liability insurance is used to ensure safety standards and manage risk. Banks generally require insurance in connection with mortgages and other financing activities. There are a number of discreet and compelling benefits to this system. The most obvious is that people who suffer harm can be made financially whole. But that is only the tip of the iceberg: another, perhaps more important, benefit is that insurance uses the marketplace to draw on a deep well of expertise to determine how risk accrues in a variety of situations. Unlike regulation, which is by its nature a one-size-fits-all mechanism, insurance is inherently adaptable – it harnesses the power and flexibility of the marketplace to assign the appropriate cost to a wide variety of risky situations. In addition, mandatory insurance is so widely applied, and so well-accepted, that it would be extremely difficult to make a 2nd Amendment argument against requiring it for many types of guns. Lastly, requiring insurance for the most dangerous guns would have the effect of enlisting the insurance industry into the public policy debates as a check against the lobbying power of the gun industry fighting firepower with fire, so to speak. Under this new approach, gun-owners would have a powerful economic incentive to maintain the highest standards of safety. Irresponsible gun owners would find it expensive – perhaps prohibitively so – to indulge in behaviors which create the potential for harm to others, while responsible ones would be rewarded with much lower rates. It would also help curb the toxic practice of ‘straw purchasing’, by imposing costs well in excess of the profits to such buyers, and by creating a paper trail which would make it easy to hold such criminals accountable. It would also provide a brake against the increasingly-common practice of people building private arsenals of high-powered weapons, since the carrying costs would be immense. This is not a perfect solution. But we believe that it is an artful and effective proposal which would, if nothing else, change the conversation around how to manage the tremendous risk posed to innocent people by those who fail to manage their weapons safely. Lastly, it has the advantage of having the potential to be implemented at the local level: just as local governments can set their own standards for liability insurance, so also could cities, counties and states create their own rules for insuring weapons.

Gun Violence is epidemic in the US and the National Rifle Association holds far too much power over Congress. Poll after poll shows that Americans support gun control. Let's take back power, defeat the NRA, and vow to campaign for politicians who rally to protect Americans and their children. We can stop the NRA by building a national Anti-NRA Alliance. Sign this petition pledge to support legislators who oppose gun violence and who support restrictions on gun sales and high taxes on ammunition.

Our nation's future is being crippled by political leaders who could not even raise taxes on income over $1M a year. For the good of our nation, those with allegiance to a no-tax pledge must not be allowed to vote on issues involving taxation, to serve on budget committees, or to take part in negotiations that involve taxes.

To reduce the powers of the Legislative Branch.