In the wake of the resignation of Tim Mapes as Executive Director of the Democratic Party of Illinois, we need a replacement who not only has strong executive skills, but who has "experienced firsthand the pervasive culture of unchecked sexual harassment that disempowers and silences women, especially women of color."* We need someone who has lived and worked for years knowing that the "Consequences for sexual harassment are few and far between in Springfield. But the political consequences for speaking out are almost guaranteed."* Having someone who has experienced both the harassment and the retribution for speaking out would be ideal. We need someone who can unite the disparate wings of the party. Someone who inspires. Someone who reflects our commitment to a strong statewide party and a better future for all. We know that person is Representative Litesa Wallace. We urge you to select Rep. Wallace to be the next Executive Director of the Democratic Party of Illinois.

Amazon’s Ring product has partnered with police to supposedly help domestic violence victims. But police have a history of escalating violence, rather than helping domestic violence victims. Amazon needs to stop partnering with police and listen to experts if they want to help families experiencing domestic violence.

Dear Members of the Massachusetts Legislature and Joint Committee on the Judiciary, We are writing to express our strong opinion as citizens of Massachusetts that Bill 661, introduced by Senator Stephen Brewer (D), does not become law in our state. In light of the killing of Trayvon Martin in Florida and the controversy surrounding the rights of George Zimmerman to have used the force that he did in the situation he created, we should not be moving towards expanding such laws in our state. Instead we should be finding ways to protect and make safer our communities and all the people who live here. Please reject Bill 661. We Stand Our Ground to move towards caring for humanity, not creating an environment that divides and frightens. Sincerely, Concerned Citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

The Old Landing Golf Course is being considered for a zoning change from AR-1, Agricultural Residential District to MR-RPC, Medium Density Residential District-Residential Planned Community (Osprey Point D, LLC), which will add 350 housing units in this environmentally sensitive area containing wetlands, burial grounds, and flood prone areas. Key concerns include: 1) The proposed Osprey Point D, LLC Site Plan is not aligned with existing nearby communities along Old Landing Road. a. The Osprey Point D, LLC Plan places townhouses along Old Landing Rd which is incongruous with the character of existing communities near the Old Landing Golf Course (OLGC), b. Housing density in Sawgrass is 2.0 units/acre and the Osprey Point D, LLC Site Plan is approximately 2.77 units/acre (as calculated by Old Landing Woods HOA) c. This plan significantly alters and disrupts the scenic views along Old Landing Road 2) The site is in the flood plain and is currently prone to flooding during storms and moderate rain. a. Adding a large amount of impervious surfaces risks flooding adjacent areas and impacts the ability of the wetlands to filter and recharge the water supply. The wetlands protect nearby residents from storm damage. b. Given this is a State Level 3 Investment area, there are very limited state funds to address roads, sewer, water and other public facilities, which raises concerns regarding how storm water management and road improvements will be addressed. c. DNREC has very limited resources to monitor and adequately inspect construction to ensure features are implemented to protect the wetlands, manage storm water, and address flooding. 3) The proposed plan and response from Sussex County and State agencies does not adequately address Life/Safety concerns. a. The proposed plan will proceed without the benefit of a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) and analysis of life/safety issues due to single lane in/out of the area during mandatory evacuations during storm events. b. Multiple accidents have occurred along this site, where vehicles have left the roadway and crashed. This poses concerns about traffic safety, property damage, pedestrian and bicyclist safety. c. Increased traffic on this winding, two-lane road likely will increase the number of accidents and hence life/safety concerns.

We, the undersigned residents, businesses owners, and visitors of Hampden DO NOT WANT additional Residential Permit Parking (RPP) to be implemented in our Baltimore neighborhood. The expansion of RPP in Hampden will do nothing to alleviate parking issues in our neighborhood, either perceived or real. The expansion of RPP will only add to our neighborhood’s parking issues, creating preferential parking areas on public streets for some area residents, while taking the right to public on street parking away from others, and discriminating against homeowners and business alike. Please immediately withdraw any RPP legislation affecting Hampden from the Baltimore City Council’s docket.

State of Oregon require mandatory water testing for contaminates prior to hooking potable water supply into homes from private wells or surface water supplies.

It has become clear that WE are engaged in a battle for Democracy itself. Instead of WE, The People, it has become a battle of US vs. Them, Rich vs. Poor in an attempt to continue to denegrate and delineate the Middle Class which has been a crucial cog in the building of this Great Nation. — "Of course there are many sincere men who now believe in unrestricted individualism in business, just as there were formerly many sincere men who believed in slavery -- that is, in the unrestricted right of an individual to own another individual. These men do not by themselves have great weight, however. The effective fight against adequate government control and supervision of individual, and especially of corporate, wealth engaged in interstate business is chiefly done under cover; and especially under cover of an appeal to States' rights.... The chief reason, among the many sound and compelling reasons, that led to the formation of the National Government was the absolute need that the Union, and not the several States, should deal with interstate and foreign commerce; and the power to deal with interstate commerce was granted absolutely and plenarily to the central government... The proposal to make the National Government supreme over, and therefore to give it complete control over, the railroads and other instruments of interstate commerce is merely a proposal to carry out to the letter one of the prime purposes, if not the prime purpose, for which the Constitution was founded. It does not represent centralization. It represents merely the acknowledgement of the patent fact that centralization has already come in business... — I believe that the more far-sighted corporations are themselves coming to recognize the unwisdom of the violent hostility they have displayed during the last few years to regulation and control by the National Government of combinations [monopolies] engaged in interstate business. The truth is that we who believe in this movement of asserting and exercising a genuine control, in the public interest, over these great corporations have to contend against two sets of enemies, who, though nominally opposed to one another, are really allies in preventing a proper solution of the problem. There are, first, the big corporation men, and the extreme individualists among business men, who genuinely believe in utterly unregulated business -- that is, in the reign of plutocracy; and, second, the men who, being blind to the economic movements of the day, believe in a movement of repression rather than of regulation of corporations, and who denounce both the power of the railroads and the exercise of the Federal power which alone can really control the railroads." Theodore Roosevelt. If this is how a stauchly conservative, albeit progressive, unquestionably monumental, Republican, addresses the issue at hand should WE not consider his advice? Join with me in asking Congress to hold Corporations and Their Special Interests under the light of closer scruity and regulation. Certainly, at least, paying they're fair share of taxes without subsidy for the vast rewards they have reaped and continue reaping.

The Radical Republican Right has refused to hear the voice of We The People, who have spoken. We wish to pursue a Progressive path, in the tradition set down by a great Republican, Theodore Roosevelt, and improved upon since, toward reform. The middle class is the strength of Our Country and must not be denegrated any further. Rather, We must support, advise, and counsel this crucial cog of Our Great Nation.

Daniel Burns, B/M 01-29-45 was stopped by my friend FHP Trooper JEFFREY DALE YOUNG. A search of his vehicle revealed a large amount of cocaine. Burns overpowered Jeff, and made him kneel on the side of I-75 and shot him in the head with his own service revolver. We got Burns later that night...He was convicted and sentenced to death, BUT he is still alive living off you on nFlorida's Death Row....Since 1989??? Where is the Justice..... After my 31 year career as a deputy sheriff I don't want to go to my maker before this Cop Killing drug dealer goes to hell! Please sign and support this petition to Florida Goveneror Rick Scott...SIGN THE DAMN DEATH WARRENT FOR DANIEL BURNS.

The Affordable Care Act will give Citizens in Indiana the ability to choose which Insurance Company they desire for health care prevention and treatment. It will also allow Hoosiers the opportunity to determine the insurance plan of choice available for their selves and their Families. The Affordable Care Act gives Senior Citizens the opportunity to save money on prescriptions by reducing and eventually closing the Donut Hole. It will allow Parents to continue Insurance coverage on their children and or students until they are twenty six years old. The greatest loss in Indiana’s state of affairs is denying Hoosiers access to affordable and preventative health care!