Posts tagged legislature
Posts tagged legislature
On this date in 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, giving women the right to vote. In the latter half of the 19th century, states began gradually loosening restrictions on voting rights for women. Most Southern states opposed the amendment, and on August 18, 1920, it all came down to Tennessee. The pro-amendment faction wore yellow roses in their lapels, and the “anti” faction wore red American Beauty roses. It was a close battle and the state legislature was tied 48 to 48. The decision came down to one vote: that of 24-year-old Harry Burn, the youngest state legislator. Proudly sporting a red rose, he cast his vote in favor of ratification. He had been expected to vote against it, but he had in his pocket a note from his mother, which instructed him to vote otherwise.
You guys PLEASE. Take five minutes for this, it is your future on the line. THERE IS A REASON YOU HAVEN’T HEARD ABOUT THIS. THE MEDIA WILL NOT COVER IT.
THIS IS UP TO US. SIGNAL. BOOST. THIS. EVERYWHERE.
THE TPPA IS A “TRADE AGREEMENT” BETWEEN THE USA AND OTHER NATIONS THAT GIVES NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY OVER TO CORPORATIONS.
IT LITERALLY MAKES CORPORATIONS MORE POWERFUL THAN GOVERNMENTS, AND THE FIRST THING THEY WILL SHUT DOWN IS INTERNET FREEDOM.
THIS IS NOT TUMBLR HYPERBOLE.
THAT IS LITERALLY WHAT THE TPPA IS.
Any nation that signs the agreement and does not comply with the following regulations can be SUED FOR BILLIONS by any corporation which feels that country is reducing FUTURE profits there. Don’t want fracking in your town? Voted against it? Your vote doesn’t really matter if Exxon can sue your town for 70 billion in lost revenue, does it? Welcome to your future - where not even your government has power against corporations.
THIS IS WHAT THE TPPA IS. IT WILL EXTEND TO EVERY AREA OF LIFE FROM ENERGY TO MEDICINE, AND WILL DO SO WORLDWIDE.
IF THIS PASSES HERE’S WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD TO:
look at the links, but this is a sample:
Internet freedom. Thanks to public rebellion, corporations hoping to lock up and monopolize the internet failed in Congress last year to pass their repressive “Stop Online Piracy Act.” However, they’ve slipped SOPA’s most pernicious provisions into TPP. Corporate-created content, for example, would be given copyright protection for a stunning 120 years!
The deal would also transform internet service providers into a private, Big Brother police force, empowered to monitor our “user activity,” arbitrarily take down our content, and cut off our access to the internet.
To top that off, consumers could be assessed mandatory fines for non-commercial, small-scale copying—like sending your mom a recipe you got off of a paid site.
Jobs. US corporations would get special foreign-investor protections to limit the cost and risk of relocating their factories to low-wage nations that sign onto this agreement. For example, an American corporation thinking about moving a factory would know it is guaranteed a sweetheart deal if it exports to a TPP nation like Vietnam. The corporation could skirt Vietnam’s laws and demand compensation at an international tribunal for any government policy or action (such as a hike in the minimum wage) that undermined its “expected” profits. These guarantees would be strong incentives for corporate chieftains to export even more of our middle-class jobs.
Food safety. Any of our government’s food safety regulations (on pesticide levels, bacterial contamination, fecal exposure, toxic additives, GMOs, non-edible fillers, etc.) that are stricter than “international standards,” as most are, could be ruled as “illegal trade barriers.” Then our government would have to revise our consumer protections to comply with the weaker global standards. Also, our government could no longer ban meat imports that don’t meet our safe-to-eat laws, as long as the exporting nation simply claims that its inspection system is “equivalent” to ours. In addition, food labeling laws we rely on (organic, country-of-origin, animal-welfare approved, GMO-free, etc.) would also be subject to challenge as trade barriers.
Fracking. Our Department of Energy would lose its authority to regulate exports of natural gas to any TPP nation. This would create an explosion of the destructive fracking process across our land, for both foreign and US corporations could export fracked gas from America to member nations without any DOE review of the environmental and economic impacts on local communities—or on our national interests. It also means that most of the gas produced by this violently polluting process will not go to us, but to foreign users, which will raise our consumer prices and cut manufacturing growth.
Drug prices. Big Pharma would be given more years of monopoly pricing on each of their patents and be empowered to block distribution of cheaper generic drugs. Besides artificially keeping everyone’s prices high, this would be a death sentence to many people suffering from cancer, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and other treatable diseases in impoverished lands. The deal would also restrict the rights of our government to negotiate with drug giants to get lower consumer prices with bulk purchases, as Medicare and Medicaid do in the US.
Banksters. Wall Street and the financial giants in other TPP countries would make out like bandits: The deal explicitly prohibits transaction taxes (such as the proposed Robin Hood Tax here) that would shut down super-rich speculators who have repeatedly triggered financial crises and economic crashes around the world; it restricts “firewall” reforms that separate consumer banking from risky investment banking (thus prohibiting Congress from reinstating the much needed Glass-Steagall firewall in our country); it could roll back reforms that governments adopted to fix the extreme bank-deregulation regimen that caused Wall Street’s 2007 crash; and it provides a backdoor escape from national rules that would limit the size of “too-big-to-fail” behemoths. These extreme provisions would be enforceable by the banks themselves—TPP empowers them to force governments either to repeal reform laws or to compensate banks with taxpayer money for “losses” they say are caused by reforms.
Public services. TPP rules would limit how governments regulate such public services as utilities, transportation, and education, including restricting policies meant to ensure broad or universal access to those essential needs. One especially insidious rule says that member countries must open their service sectors to private competitors, which would allow the corporate provider to cherry pick the profitable customers and sink the public service. Also, corporations from any TPP nation must be allowed to bid on contracts to provide public services in the US on the same terms as American corporations.
THIS IS VERY REAL, AND IT IS BEING HIDDEN FROM YOU BECAUSE THEY KNOW HOW AWFUL IT IS AND WANT TO PASS IT WITHOUT ANYONE KNOWING.
OBAMA WANTS TO FAST-TRACK IT THROUGH HOUSE AND CONGRESS IN OCTOBER WITH NO MEDIA COVERAGE WHATSOEVER.
Here is a letter from a group of one hundred and two economists (from Tufts University) to Trade Ministers involved in the talk begging them to change the policy that would allow corporations to sue nations, because they fear it would make those nations unable to control thier own economies and lead to widespread financial disaster. (http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/policy_research/TPPAletter.html)
Electronic Frontier Foundation (https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp)
GOOGLE : Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement
Facebook group: (https://www.facebook.com/TPPTuesdaysMarchOnMedia)
IN 2013 THERE ARE 624 BILLS REGULATING WOMEN’S BODIES.
THERE HAVE NEVER BEEN ANY BILLS REGULATING A MAN’S BODY.
TELL ME AGAIN WHY FEMINISM ISN’T IMPORTANT. (⊙‿⊙✿)
Jury nullification. Pass it on.
Jury nullification is so fucking important.
This is something that more people should be aware of, if only because (in many states, at least) defense attorneys are actually prohibited from mentioning it to jurors. The law allows a jury to return a “not guilty” verdict contrary to the facts of the case, but not for the defense to inform them of that power or to argue for its application in the current trial.
Wait, what? Jurors don’t get told this? Why the everloving fuck not?