Congress needs to push for climate action that will shift our country to stop relying on greenhouse gasses and invest in 100% renewable energy. This includes supporting working-class people and creating green jobs and infrastructure that will boost our economy, invests in working people, and create a more sustainable future. Photo credit: Tyler Pasciak LaRiviere/Sun-Times

Under the fairness doctrine, any news organization was required to provide content on political issues from both parties (or if there was a third party, their viewpoint as well). If you are a Gen Xer, you remember the show Point, Counterpoint on PBS. Instead of making a blanket statement or series of statements on a buzzword issue, evidence was required to back your position, and more importantly, all news organizations were required to allow the opposing viewpoint an equal amount of time - hence the word "fairness" - on their news segment. The Fairness Doctrine also required that news media report errors in their reporting, and to provide corrections to anything that was potentially misleading whether in print or on the air. The Fairness Doctrine was enacted shortly after WWII and it was designed to combat three things. The prevalence of "yellow journalism" where papers would print wild and crazy stories only to incite emotions off of half truths, or frankly just falsehoods with the altruistic goal of simply selling more importantly sell newspapers. These newspapers were printed on cheap paper, that yellowed, which is where we get the term "yellow journalism". The second was to combat the monopoly newly formed television and radio networks had on the news, and their potential to abuse that monopoly to skew information that was provided to the masses to a narrative that the media companies wanted to present to the masses. This law was designed to ensure the media could not use their power to persuade their audience to behave the way they wanted. The third was that in the wake of WWII, we realized the power of news media when we looked at what happened to the German people prior to and during WWII. The Germans were nationalized by Hitler’s media machine that spewed hate, lies and propaganda that allowed the Third Reich to exist and thrive; the people of Germany, because of the propaganda allowed the atrocities of the Third Reich to happen. We passed the Fairness Doctrine to ensure that the news media in this country would not be able to do the same to our people. We wanted our people to make informed decisions, not decisions based upon emotion, or fear about issues that were insignificant, or easily rebuked. The Fairness Doctrine was repealed by President Reagan, and the once mundane news networks became exciting. The first household name that benefited from the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was a man named Rush Limbaugh. Using the removal of this law, he was able to present news, and information in a one-sided and biased format, without providing information about why his viewpoint may be biased, or even completely incorrect. He used this to his advantage and amassed a massive following and a fortune spreading his one-sided viewpoints. Some of his stories were credible, others were completely misleading. I use Limbaugh only because he was a household name. Both parties benefited from the repeal of this legislation. Likewise, even though Reagan's administration repealed the Fairness Doctrine, it was not party based, and both parties benefited from this law's repeal, as they could use the media to push their own agendas. Think about watching Fox News for a day and then watching MSBNC. They push stories and commentary that is one sided, a lot of which would completely fall apart if they had to present a counterpoint. The media companies, and this is perhaps the real reason the Fairness Doctrine was repealed wanted this as well. They could sell fear on stories and issues that again sounded very scary when you presented one side, but when the other side was presented, the story would fall flat. They could sensationalize the news, and well, make more money. Reagan’s repeal of the Fairness Doctrine likely had more to do with his former acting career and his Hollywood influence more than anything to do with political parties. The Fairness Doctrine prevented misinformation from being spread by actual news organizations. It prevented the spread of nationalistic ideology, and more importantly it required that the news media accurately report on stories that they covered, present facts that were verifiable, and provide an opportunity to discuss an alternative viewpoint. We need to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine to hold our news media accountable. This will stop sensationalizing the news and give the common voter in this country access to honest, reliable information.

Donald Trump and his cronies spread endless lies and misinformation following the 2020 election, which led to the deadly insurrection on January 6. Trump stopped at nothing to try to overturn the 2020 election results and overthrow our government. He is dangerous. He will keep lying to hold on to power, which is why it is important that we, the public, get the transparency that we deserve. Sign this petition to call on the Judicial Conference to approve televising the trials of Donald Trump. Doing so will give all of us the opportunity to see how justice works in our country and can go a long way toward combating the rampant rumors and conspiracy theories that would otherwise be flooding the airwaves and internet. Donald Trump and his allies will attempt to call these trials politically motivated or an abuse of power, but the American people deserve to hear the truth in court themselves. Once again, we urge you to approve televising these historic trials.

As women who fly and are on the go all the time, exposed to hundreds of people , tired and exhausted, when we get to a place we need to crash it is important to have a peace of mind when we rest. Critical components of rest and sleep requires a sense of saftey and comfort. These cameras inside the home we crash at has caused stress and worry of our privacy. And will lead to further complication that could follow into our workplace.

As a community we should expect that our local police department will have an active role in our area. As of yet we have not seen the presence to justify the $21 charge. This charge is not only unjustified but it is a burden for families that are forced to pay the fee when the cost of uninvolved police presence could be paying for other critical needs such as utilities, food, or pleasure. Join me in signing this position to bring our voices together to stop this unjustified and unnecessary fee.

To give back to those who have selflessly given us their all.

The Green New Deal for Cities would provide local governments the funding to create good-paying, union jobs repairing their infrastructure, improving water quality, reducing air pollution, cleaning up our nation's parks, creating new green spaces We need to give our local communities the funding and support to act to prevent even further environmental collapse. The Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act is a great start, but the scale of the the climate crisis and the threats that it poses to the health, safety, and livelihoods of our communities demand that we go further to rapidly de-transition from fossil fuels to a green economy. Source for image: Growing Together by James McInvale (left), Breathing New Life Into America by Caitlin Alexander (center), The Green New Deal by Jordan Johnson (right). From the Green New Deal poster series by Creative Action Network.

The Supreme Court's ruling is a devastating blow to equal opportunity and diversity. By axing race-conscious admissions but leaving protections in place for legacy admissions, the court is perpetuating a system that caters to the privileged and widens the inequality gap. This decision disregards the promises made to Black and brown families about fair opportunities for education, work, and economic stability. I believe that access to education is a right, not a luxury. This ruling favors those who are born into privilege, while leaving marginalized communities behind. It is out of touch with the current needs of our country and denies the reality of systemic racism and the urgent need to address historical injustices. We all benefit from diverse communities that bring together different voices, experiences, and backgrounds. It is the lifeblood of a strong democracy, and we cannot let this decision roll back decades of progress and trample on the principles of equal protection. However, I believe that there is still hope. Colleges and universities have the power to prioritize diversity and inclusion, even in the absence of affirmative action policies. We have seen this in the state of California, where public schools had to find alternative ways to address educational disparities after affirmative action was voted down almost 30 years ago. Therefore, we urge colleges and universities to take immediate action to prioritize diversity and inclusion in their admissions processes. This can be achieved through various means, such as implementing holistic admissions processes that consider a wide range of factors, expanding outreach efforts to underrepresented communities, investing in scholarships and financial aid programs for marginalized students, creating mentorship and support programs, and collaborating with community organizations and schools to develop pipeline programs. By taking these steps, colleges and universities can demonstrate their commitment to addressing educational disparities and promoting a more inclusive and equitable society. Access to education should be a right for all, not a luxury for a privileged few. Therefore, I call on colleges and universities to prioritize diversity and inclusion in their admissions processes and take proactive measures to address educational disparities. Together, let us challenge the Supreme Court's decision and fight for a more just and equal society. Sincerely, Jonathan McGinley Portland, Oregon

A diverse and representative Supreme Court is not just a goal; it's an imperative for our democracy. The decisions made by the Supreme Court have a profound impact on the lives of every American, and to ensure that justice is served, the Court must reflect the experiences and perspectives of the diverse communities it serves. For the first 80 years of the U.S. judicial system, there wasn't a single woman represented. And over 200 years later, progress has continued to lag. About a third of all judicial positions are held by women and only 2% of federal judges are Black women. And for the highest court in our country, the statistics are even more dismal. Out of the 115 justices that have served on the Supreme Court, only six have been women and we have never had an out transgender or gender nonbinary justice appointed. By promoting greater representation of women of color in the judicial system, we are opening doors to much-needed expertise, fresh perspectives, and a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the challenges faced by different communities. A diverse Supreme Court can help build trust in the judicial system and foster greater public confidence in the decisions made by the Court. Additionally, when we have federal judicial courts that are truly representative, we send a powerful message to every young person that they too can aspire to serve on the highest court in the land. Yes, we know this inspiring Supreme Court of Barbie Land is just a movie—but maybe it's time we take the compelling vision of fiction and infuse our reality with it. Like Barbie, every young person in this country should know they can be anything they want to be.

This is not just a matter of compassion; it is essential for the education and future of our youth. Countless studies have demonstrated that hungry children struggle to focus, learn, and reach their full potential academically. By guaranteeing free school meals, we address childhood hunger and make a critical investment in the well-being of our future generations. States like Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, Vermont, and California have already taken steps to implement policies that provide free meals to all kids, resulting in positive outcomes in combating childhood hunger and improving educational performance. It is imperative that we stand firm against any proposal that undermines the free school meals program and instead advocate for policies that make it easier for children to access nutritious meals at school.

We, the concerned citizens and supporters of “Literacy and Justice for all” urge the Houston Independent School District to reconsider its plans for converting library spaces into detention centers. Let us collectively protect and nurture the sanctity of libraries as beacons of knowledge and learning, fostering a love for reading and empowering students to succeed academically and beyond. By preserving these invaluable resources, we can create a more equitable and enriched educational experience for all students within the Houston community.

We live in a time where convenience makes a difference. It will be a added bonus to be able to have liquor delivered to your door since you have the option to have everything else delivered.