Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act H.R. 2088 & S. 1171 The Problem Although employer-provided health coverage for different-sex spouses is excluded from an employee’s gross income, domestic partner benefits are not. As a result, an employee who elects domestic partner coverage pays more income and payroll tax than a similarly-situated employee with a different-sex spouse. Moreover, because of this inequitable treatment, employers who offer benefits to domestic partners face the administrative burden of calculating taxes separately, and they also pay additional payroll taxes. What is the Tax Parity for Domestic Partner and Health Plan Beneficiaries Act/Tax Equity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act? The Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act (DP Tax) would end the taxation of benefits provided for domestic partners and other non-spouse beneficiaries under employers’ health plans. The bill would exclude the value of employer-provided health insurance for a domestic partner or other non-spouse beneficiary from an eligible employee’s income, as it does for benefits provided for a spouse or dependent. This legislation does not mandate that employers provide coverage to non-spouse beneficiaries. Nor does it establish criteria for determining which beneficiaries qualify. This remains the province of the employers themselves. The bill simply eliminates the unfair taxation of benefits that employers choose to provide. The bill would also make clear that domestic partners or non-dependents can be included in pre-tax cafeteria plan elections, permit Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Associations (VEBAs) to provide full benefits to domestic partners and non-dependents, and extend Health Related Savings Accounts to cover domestic partners and other non-dependents. Finally, the bill would equalize the treatment of health coverage for spouses and for domestic partners and other non-dependents for payroll tax purposes. Growing Numbers of Top Employers Offer Equal Family Benefits In growing numbers, employers across the country have made the business decision to provide health benefits to domestic partners of their employees. Fifty-nine percent of Fortune 500 companies provide such coverage. This is more than a twelve-fold increase from 1995 and underscores a clear trend in the American workplace. Federal tax law has not kept up with the business community, however, and employers that offer such benefits as well as the employees who receive them are taxed inequitably. What is the Current Status of the Bill? DP Tax was reintroduced in the 112th Congress in the House by Reps. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Richard Hanna (R-NY) and Nan Hayworth (R-NY) on June 2, 2011 and in the Senate by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Susan Collins (R-ME) on June 9, 2011. (from HRC.org)

We, the people on behalf of all women in and of the United States of America, demand the number of seats, appointments, higher offices, etc., be set equal to the actual proportion of women in the population, thereby guaranteeing appropriate representation of womens interests in the future of all children, their families, and all generations to come. Until this problem is corrected, true equality and justice for all will never become a reality. The time has come to change this.

In the US, adjuncts teach over seventy percent of all US college level classes but typically work voicelessly without any participation and negotiating rights, without contractual security, and for shameless pay, often making around $1,800 at the community college level and $7,000 in Ivy League schools per class per semester. Adjuncts who work as full-timers do in community colleges get half the pay of the average worker in America, falling way below the poverty line and are thereby unable to support vital interests. It is time that the dirty secret of higher education be exposed and democratically modified to meet greater equity and sound respect for our adjunct professors. Tell your representatives and state senate: "Write, finally, a horizontal contract to save the constitution of higher education and intitiate the rights of adjunct professors: establish worker participation, security, and greater monetary equity for adjuncts."

When Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he said, "because that's where the money is." The billionaires have been gaming the system to strip mine the 99% for thirty years. It's time to return the favor, "because that's where the money is." The 1% have played the 99% for fools, conning them to squeeze more out of everyone except the 1%. The country was prosperous when the super-rich paid 90% taxes and did fine. The 1% own half the country and can afford it. Every time the 1% get a tax cut, the rest of us make up the difference. Don't be fooled, money is power. Don't try to squeeze more out of the 99%. To get our country moving again, tax the rich, "because that's where the money is."

Stop the proposed block on sex education in public schools.

Lets work to honor our veterans like they should be

Stop the bullying and verbal abuse of people who cannot defend themselves. Please?

Stop the bullying and verbal abuse of people who cannot defend themselves. Please?

Let's tell our Lawmakers and Representatives to make checking the credit of a job applicant illegal. This is not to be confused with a regular background and criminal check. How someone's credit score define that individual's character? If people with poor credit are looking for work, they should not be denied employment because of their credit history. It just doesn't make sense. Employers should not be allowed to ask about credit check anymore because many honest and qualified men and women are unjustly denied jobs. How can someone fix credit issues without a job? Don't we have millions of honest and highly qualified people with bad credit as a result of losing their jobs? If you think it's unfair that some employers are denying jobs to people with bad credit, especially in this economy, sign this petition to tell your local Representatives and US Lawmakers to make credit checking illegal.

Land owner's right to their land!