Children age 14 and older should have the right to choose which parent they live with in divorce situations.

USDA Rural Utility Service’s proposal to fund Energy Answers’ waste incinerator in Arecibo, Puerto Rico is a waste of taxpayer money and makes no sense from either an economic or environmental perspective. According to the Energy Information Administration, waste incineration is the most costly form of energy production per unit of energy or power. The Arecibo project will deepen the financial crisis currently experienced by Puerto Rico’s municipalities by forcing them to pay higher tipping fees and discouraging recycling and other more economic waste management methods. The proposed incinerator will also lock Puerto Rico—a place where wind and solar could generate more than 100 percent of electricity needs—into electricity from one of the most polluting methods of energy production per unit of energy. The proposed incinerator will emit lead in an area already in violation of the Clean Air Act’s air quality standards for lead. The incinerator also will be a major source of all other criteria air pollutants. And the project will generate thousands of tons of potentially toxic incinerator ash each year. Energy Answers is now asking RUS to step in and make this terrible idea a reality. Don’t waste my taxpayer dollars on this unwise investment!

Boycott of boxing and all Pay Per View revenue streams of boxing until a legitimate competent governing body is created in order to protect the sanctity of boxing, it's athletes and the millions of dollars that we spend to watch boxers in fair and authentic competition.

Stop the unjust actions that the Cal Boro cops have done.

I urge you to support language in HB 2045 and SB 5892 that will strengthen and extend the incentives for on-site and community wind in the Washington Renewable Energy Cost Recovery Program (CRP), following recommendations developed by the Washington Distributed and Community Wind Stakeholder Group convened by the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center and endorsed by the Local Energy Alliance of Washington and the Distributed Wind Energy Association. Several factors have served to limit the deployment of distributed wind in Washington State. The existing incentive rate for wind has not been sufficient to motivate consumers to act. Even though the capital costs are higher for distributed wind, the incentive rates for solar have been much higher, particularly for numerous adders not available for wind. Specifically, the CRP incentive rate provides only a 20% capital cost recovery over a 10-year incentive period, and a $5,000 limit on the total annual payments per participant limits the size of wind turbine that can be cost-effectively installed. 1) Payment levels need to increase to allow the policy to succeed for wind: More effective incentives for various market sectors and system sizes should be offered based on kWh production: a starting rate of 30 cents/kWh for residential scale wind (owned by the customer-generator), 20 cents/kWh for commercial distributed wind (owned by the customer-generator or a third party), and 10 cents/kWh for community wind (developed by utility, non-profit, business, or local government with local benefits and local control). The current $5,000 cap per participant should be replaced with a project cap of 10 MW to allow greater commercial ownership. 2) In-state installation and manufacturing jobs can be encouraged with additional business models: Wind energy towers, which comprise approximately 30% of wind system costs, have previously been and could easily again be manufactured in Washington. Wind towers should be added as a component which allows projects to qualify for a 20% "Made in Washington" (MIW) adder. In addition, payments made to third parties can open participation by commercial entities other than the customer-generator. 3) Wind is currently included and should remain in the incentive: A technology neutral program with consumer protection measures enables appropriate technologies to be cost-effectively developed for a wider range of locations. Expanding community solar incentives to include community wind options can allow Washingtonians to participate based on what best suits their local resources. Community wind projects should be allowed to be owned by utilities based on customer participation requirements; by government or tribal entities; and by non-profits or businesses for projects with 51% local ownership and/or control plus documented support from the local jurisdiction, articulated defined community benefit, and approved by the program administrator. The CRP was enacted by the legislature not only to encourage renewable energy, but also to give all Washingtonians the opportunity to participate in our energy future. I urge you not to exclude wind from playing a valuable role in diversifying Washington's energy infrastructure. Thank you for your consideration.

Legislation must be passed to limit the amount of our taxpayer money spent on the Trump family's golf trips, vacations, and business trips—and on future presidents' expenses. Pass the "No Taxpayer Revenue Used to Monetize the Presidency" (No TRUMP) Act.

On January 30, 2025, Politico’s E&E News reported that the EPA had sent letters two days prior to recipients of funding through the Solar for All program informing them that their grants had been paused until further notice.1 EPA’s letter went on to explain that it was pausing “all funding actions related to” climate and infrastructure laws enacted during the Biden Administration, citing President Donald J. Trump’s “Unleashing American Energy” Executive Order. Many of us have also been contacted by grantees in our states reporting that they no longer have access to the grant money that has been obligated to them.  Federal law and regulations require that obligated funds be provided to grantees absent proof of misuse of funds.2 We further note that the Solar for All program furthers several goals, all of which are part of EPA’s core mission, which you support. It is designed to help reduce carbon pollution, air pollutants, and household energy costs by financing community and rooftop solar in low-income communities. It will further help drive American manufacturing, boosting the economy and creating jobs. Even President Trump’s Department of Energy continues to acknowledge that “[i]nvesting in energy innovations creates well-paying jobs, drives economic growth, and makes our industries more competitive,” and that the “growing global market for renewable energy technologies and innovations is projected to be worth at least $23 trillion by 2030.”3 

On January 31, 2025, the CDC removed numerous pages from its website to comply with Trump’s executive order, "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government." This order forces the federal government to only recognize two sexes—male and female, resulting in the erasure of vital public health data under the pretense of "promoting gender ideology." What Was Deleted? • Years of Adolescent Mental Health Data: The Youth Risk Behavior Survey, which tracks teen mental health, substance use, and suicide risk, has been gutted—simply because it included questions on gender identity. • LGBTQ Youth Support Resources: Pages on suicide risk, school safety, and health disparities for LGBTQ youth have been completely erased. • The website of the National Institutes of Health's Office for Sexual & Gender Minority Research Office is gone Other pages were deleted and don't seem to have any connection to gender.  • Data Analysis Tool: AtlasPus which allowed users to analyze data on HIV, STDs, TB, and viral hepatitis was removed. • Community Vulnerability Index: The CDC Social Vulnerability Index, which helps identify communities most at risk during disasters and public health crises, has vanished. • A page about food safety during pregnancy called “Safer Food Choices for Pregnant People”   We Must Act NOW! Demand that this data be restored! Call your representatives. Raise awareness. Public health should never be sacrificed for politics.

On September 10th, 2025, Co-Host of Fox and Friends Brian Kilmeade called for the killing of the unhoused by “involuntary lethal injection”. Here is the full transcript: LAWRENCE JONES (FOX HOST):  We don't have to — we feel so compassionate because you see the mental health crisis happening. AINSLEY EARHARDT (FOX HOST): You just get — exactly. JONES  But it's not our job — we shouldn't have to live in fear while they figure out what is going on right there. EARHARDT: Right, right. JONES: Put him in a mental institution, put him in a jail, and you guys figure it out. But people having to duck and dive on the trains and the buses, walking through the street, this is one case, but this is happening all across the country, and it's not a money issue. They have given billions of dollars to mental health and the homeless population. A lot of them don't want to take the programs, a lot of them don't want to get the help that is necessary. You can't give them a choice. Either you take the resources that we're going to give you and — or you decide that you are going to be locked up in jail. That's the way it has to be now. BRIAN KILMEADE (FOX HOST): Or involuntary lethal injection. JONES: Yeah. KILMEADE : Or something. Just kill them. EARHARDT: Yeah, Brian, why did it have to get to this point? This hateful and dangerous suggestion is inexcusable. Kilmeade must be fired immediately. Please do the right thing and terminate his employment with Fox. 

On Thursday, my child arrived home to tell me that the 7th graders at Edgar Middle School had to sit in silence during lunchtime because of several disruptive students in the lunchroom. The students remained in the lunchroom for so long that an announcement was made that the students would be late to their next class.  This is one of a series of judgment calls made in the last year by school administration to manage student behavior (2024 police threats in classrooms is another example). Hearing these stories about our children brings forth confusion, anger, and frustration.  Even more, since last year, numerous parents have sought to meet with and learn from Edgar administration and Metuchen’s superintendent about the circumstances of these events. Very few, if any of them, received clear if any responses.  We deserve answers for our children. I am asking you to join me, and other parents, in seeking an explanation about the climate at Edgar and the rationale for the behavioral approaches we have consistently seen in the school. I believe the following areas will help us gain immediate clarity: 1. Comparison to other Metuchen schools a. Disciplinary statistics for the past 5 years, since this administration took over.  2. Follow up from the 2024 “parent survey” a. Detailed information for the fall of 2024 “parent survey” beyond the short summary provided in December 2024.  3. Comparison to NJ schools a. Results of the NJ School Climate Survey from March 2025 Many of us has tried alone. It’s time to come together.