We want the stakeholders to prioritize and allocate increased funding for mental health services in schools. This funding should be directed towards hiring qualified mental health professionals, implementing comprehensive mental health programs, and providing training for educators on recognizing and addressing mental health issues among students.  Additionally, we urge stakeholders to establish partnerships with local mental health organizations to enhance resources and support for students. This collaboration can help create a more robust system of care, ensuring that students have access to the necessary tools and support to promote their mental well-being.  Ultimately, the goal is to foster an environment where mental health awareness is integrated into the school culture, leading to a higher quality of youth mental health services and better outcomes for students.

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), of which your company is a dues-paying member, contributed more than $2 million last year to defeat Proposition 37, a California citizens' initiative that would have required mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food products. Now, the GMA is so far the largest donor to defeat a similar initiative, I-522, on the ballot on November 5 in Washington state. By supporting the GMA, your company is supporting efforts to deny me a basic consumer right, one that consumers in 64 other countries have. I will not spend one more dime on your products until your company supports my right to know if my food contains GMOs. Specifically, I want you to support I-522 by making a substantial donation to the YES on I-522 campaign. I'm also asking you to demand that the GMA support consumers' right to know, and if it won't, that your company withdraw from the GMA. The New York Times just published a new poll showing that 93% of consumers want mandatory labeling of GMOs. As a consumer, I choose not to support your company or your products until you support my right to know.

Like many public schools across the country, New Jersey's Newark Public Schools are under attack by their own leadership. Many Newark students, residents, and district employees agree on state-appointed Superintendent Cami Anderson's gross mismanagement of the city's schools. Her policies have adversely affected its most vulnerable populations, particularly students with special needs. This year, the projected number of incoming Special Education (SPED) freshmen for Central High School, a comprehensive public high school, increased yet again. This is a direct result of the adoption of Anderson's One Newark Plan, an enrollment system that uses a biased algorithm to carelessly spread students across the district. Current projections indicate there will be 80 new Freshman SPED students, representing 29% of the total incoming Freshmen class, which the school cannot accommodate in compliance with law. The district percentage of special needs is 15%. That makes Central's Freshman SPED population 93% over the district’s average. Ignoring this phenomenon is a blatant attempt to create hardships in comprehensive schools in order for them to fail. Our principal, Sharnee Brown, has boldly taken action to fight this attack on Central High School's students, staff, and community.

Consumers have a right to make healthy, responsible, and informed choices about the food they eat. Please label Harris Teeter's store-brand products that contain GMOs.

As a consumer interested in food safety, and one of the 93% of Americans who want mandatory labeling of foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs), I am very disappointed that you are asking the FDA to finalize its 2001 guidance on voluntary labeling of GMOs. I am writing to ask you to abandon your current course and instead support the rights of states to enact mandatory GMO labeling laws and/or support the Boxer bill, S. 809, a federal law that calls for mandatory labeling of GMOs. Judging from its track record, the FDA is likely to use a final guidance to outlaw the use of non-GMO labels on products that have been tested and certified as GMO-free. Worse yet, the FDA could take away states' rights to pass GMO labeling laws on the basis of its original, and highly controversial, ruling that GMO and non-GMO foods are "substantially equivalent." Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which have spent millions trying to defeat GMO labeling laws in California and Washington state, have publicly endorsed the FDA's 2001 guidance. That should be proof enough that if the FDA finalizes its guidance on voluntary GMO labels, consumers will be the losers. Please withdraw your request to the FDA and instead support meaningful, mandatory—not voluntary—legislation that protects the interests of consumers, and your constituents, not those of the biotech and food industries.

US Senator Kay Biley Hutchinson CPS Policy and Procedure Law 1230 passed. REPEAL MONDALE ACT Departmental income has become more important to CPS and their offices than actually finding abused children and protecting them. Each and every time they remove a child from the home, they get paid from the Federal Government. Here they are: 1. Public Law 93-247 known as the Mondale Act of 1974. 2. Public Law 96-272 known as the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 3. Social Security Title IV-E funds. The ASFA- Public Law 105-89 known as American Safe Families Act of 1997 is one of the most horrific laws on the books today. While it sounds nice in the title, when you get through the legal jargon, what this means is so wrong. If you ever had a child removed from your house by CPS, even UNFOUNDED and you are innocent, they will take that child in minutes after the child is born! Babies are highly adoptable . I had a Grandchild that I raised from birth taken from Private Christian school and thrown into Orphan adoption with no charges against me. We are Heartbroken...The family forbid us to have contact after the adoption ordwer was signed, NEW LAW INDICATES OUR 4TH AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED. CHILD WAS TAKEN 4 MONTHS AFTER CPS LAW 1230 WAS ENACTED..PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION TO REPEAL THE MONDALE LAW. THANKS. KATIE CALDWELL

Recently Dr. Chau, of the Orange County Health Care Agency in California has rescinded the requirement to wear face masks in public to a suggestion. The conclusion people are having is that the pandemic has ended since face masks are no longer required. A 93-year-old woman recently commented that “Since face masks are not required, the virus must be over.” This is an erroneous interpretation, because no effort is being taken to correct this conclusion. This should not be the message being understood right now, especially since infection rates and deaths are still increasing. It should be strongly recommended that people continue to wear face masks in public and in places of business. Wearing face masks has been found to be effective in reducing the spread of the Covid-19 virus. This is especially important now that we are reopening businesses. It should not be assumed that the virus has "gone away" because more businesses are reopening. On the contrary, we are now seeing an increase of infection because of a lax in attitude by not continuing the precautionary measures that have been used at the onset of the Covid-19 virus. Some of this increase is due to the availability of more testing, but this is not the only data point. The numbers are increasing because the virus is still very active and is continuing to spread. Orange County health officials should immediately and proactively move to: (1) Educate the community on the merits of wearing face masks in public places and in businesses. (2) Use various forms of mass media and local media to communicate this message repeatedly and with urgency.

Speaking at this year's BIO International Convention, you reiterated your support for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). You said the industry needs "a better vocabulary" to change negative public perception about GMO agriculture. But mounting scientific evidence says the public is right to be concerned about the impact of Monsanto's GMO crops and food on the environment, public health and global warming. We don't need a better vocabulary. We need leaders who will stand up to Monsanto. As a mother, soon-to-be grandmother and potential future candidate for U.S. president, please do what's right, not what the biotech industry lobbyists want you to do.

We request an investigation on Unlawful arrests as well as Unlawful warrants! 14th Amendment violation SUPREME COURT CASE:. Kolender v. Lawson (461 U.S. 352, 1983) in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that a police officer could not arrest a citizen merely for refusing to present identification. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "FAILURE TO IDENTIFY" YOU CAN SUE THE POLICE FOR AN ILLEGAL ARREST AND RESIST ARREST WITH IMPUNITY! "An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempte be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force+ defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery." (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260). "Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a cas838 the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self-defense." (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910). "These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds there of the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private Photoal who unlawfully uses such force and violence." Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Randolph Jath, Tex. 93, 903. An email signed paper in not a valid warrant.. Allen v.City of Portland, 73 F.3rd, (232) (9th cir. 1995): Unlawful Arrests Anderson v. Branen, 17 F.3rd 552 (2d cir. 1994. Many more laws violated! Police and government officials must uphold our constitutional rights.

Two days after Nurses represented by CRONA at Stanford’s children's and adult hospitals provided a strike notice, executives announced they would cut off health benefits for striking workers. The Stanford hospitals could maintain benefits, but have chosen to use benefits as a weapon to punish Nurses for standing up for ourselves and our patients. CEOs David Entwistle and Paul King must reverse course and retract this threat.