Local Regulations

SEE TWOThis  refers to industry using lawsuits and federal regulations to overturn city and states rules to protect the common good, especially pernicious are assertion of corporate personhood.

Ironic, since conservatives are always evoking local control.  tom corbett sludge packer PA
local regs can be trumped by fed? state law or ballot prop hijacked by corps eg palstic ban bag==an 6 23texas Republican Governor Greg Abbott signed legislation earlier this week that "poses serious health risks" to construction workers, Texas Public Radio (TPR) reports.Per TPR, HB 2127 — known as the Texas Regulatory Consistency Act — "bars cities and counties from passing regulations that are stricter than state ones. It also overturns local rules such as ordinances in Austin and Dallas that mandate rest breaks for construction workers."Republican State Rep. Dustin Burrows, who proposed the "Death Star Bill," insisted "the law is needed to end 'the current hodgepodge of onerous and burdensome regulations,'" but TPR notes "for construction workers in two of the state's fastest-growing cities, advocates say, it poses serious health risks."READ MORE: Neither 'compassion' nor 'leadership': Greg Abbott blasted for calling shooting victims 'illegal immigrants'Mario Ontiveros told TPR "he once saw a co-worker lose consciousness and fall from a ladder," and due to his previous "safety training," the Texas construction worker "was the only one on the job site who knew how to help — performing CPR and asking his co-worker basic questions to keep him conscious — until paramedics arrived, he said."The Texas Tribune reports:Texas is the state where the most workers die from high temperatures, government data shows. At least 42 workers died in Texas between 2011 and 2021 from environmental heat exposure, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Workers’ unions claim this data doesn’t fully reflect the magnitude of the problem because heat-related deaths are often recorded under a different primary cause of injury.Furthermore, according to TPR, "Research published in 2018 — eight years after Austin passed its rest-break ordinance — found that construction workers were 35% more likely to get a break because of the rule."Daniela Hernandez, state legislative coordinator for Texas advocacy group Workers Defense Action Fund, said, "We know that workers do pass out and experience heat stress and different types of heat illnesses."READ MORE: Gov. Greg Abbott leaves experts stunned as he injects politics into Texas' criminal justice systemPaul Puente, executive secretary of the Houston Gulf Coast Building and Construction Trades Council, said the "Death Star Bill" is expected to "strike down construction-worker protections in southeast Texas," and "negatively impact construction safety as a whole," even though "labor unions can still negotiate for rest breaks."He emphasized "Science has already shown that individuals need to have time to take a break, collect their thoughts, and then return back to work to ensure a safe working environment," and "Without allotted rest breaks in extreme heat," he told TPR "workers can easily become fatigued, disoriented, dehydrated — effects that endanger their lives."Calling the state "unsafe" for construction workers, Puente added, "when you're trying to encourage businesses to come to your state, this is not a good look."TPR reports the law is set to go into effect Sept. 1.READ MORE: 'Absolutely insane': Texas Governor Greg Abbott seeks pardon for man convicted of murdering BLM protesterTexas Public Radio's full report is available at this link. The Texas Tribune's report is here.FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES'Bald-faced lie': Houston Chronicle torches Texas gov’s 'bankrupt conscience' and 'cowardice' after Uvalde mass shooting ›Texas Democrat: Greg Abbott 'can’t explain away' allowing easy access to weapons ›Greg Abbott implicates 'the government' in Saturday’s mass shooting ›RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEBGreg Abbott tells state agencies to stop considering diversity in ... ›Tesla's construction workers at Texas gigafactory allege labor ... ›Texas governor calls on citizens to report parents of transgender ... ›==worst is props?!<a href="https://theintercept.com/2018/11/07/midterm-elections-green-ballot-measures-fossil-fuel/">https://theintercept.com/2018/11/07/midterm-elections-green-ballot-measures-fossil-fuel/</a><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">intercept</div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">no lnx </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">tHE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY SPENT $100 MILLION TO KILL GREEN BALLOT MEASURES IN THREE STATES — AND WON</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">One clear takeaway from the ballot initiatives in Arizona, Colorado, and Washington state is that fossil fuel money can buy elections.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Kate Aronoff</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">November 7 2018, </div><div>PATRICIA NELSON WAS eager for a fresh start when she moved her family from Louisiana back home to Weld County, Colorado, in 2016. Soon after, Nelson’s friend encouraged her to come out to a meeting where Lisa McKenzie, an environmental chemist and epidemiologist at the Colorado School of Public Health, was presenting her research on the health impacts of oil and natural gas drilling.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>Weld County has one of the highest concentrations of oil and gas wells in the country — 23,000 within county limits. Its air quality carries an “F” rating from the American Lung Association, with infant mortality rates twice as high as those in surrounding counties. With around 50,000 active wells overall, Colorado just surpassed California to become America’s third-largest oil and gas producer after Texas and North Dakota.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“It was a crash course in fracking,” Nelson told me by phone. Colorado law, she learned, states that drilling operations have to be 1,000 feet away from school buildings, but that ordinance — known as a setback — doesn’t include surrounding school properties, like playgrounds or soccer fields. There, as McKenzie would explain, kids playing and running around breathe harder and heavier, increasing the amount of poisoned air that enters their lungs and bloodstream.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">All of this hit too close to home: As she also learned, oil companies had just been approved to open 24 new drill sites near her then-4-year-old son Diego’s school, the kindergarten through third grade campus of Bella Romero Academy; the drilling would take place just behind the fourth through eighth grade campus, where her niece and nephew were students. The decision to drill near Bella Romero at all — where 87 percent of attendees are students of color, and 90 percent fall below the poverty line — was made after parents at an overwhelmingly white school refused to have the same rigs in their kids’ backyards.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Shocked by what she discovered, Nelson joined a coalition that would later become known as Colorado Rising and traveled around the state, telling people about the stakes at her son’s school. Colorado Rising’s work included a push for Proposition 112, a ballot measure to mandate a 2,500-foot setback zone between drill sites and homes, schools, and other vulnerable areas. That measure was defeated 57 to 43 on Tuesday night, in large part thanks to a full-fledged freakout by the fossil fuel industry, which, with $40 million, outspent Prop 112 proponents by at least 40 to 1.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“I guess the oil and gas industry is just another example of money buying elections.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>“This is much farther than we’ve gotten before, and we’re no longer going to accept this industry bullying us,” Nelson told me last night, celebrating the fact that Prop 112 even made it on the ballot. “We had a pretty good shot, but they definitely had way more resources than we did. I guess the oil and gas industry is just another example of money buying elections.”</div><div>
</div><div>Environmental initiatives on the ballot elsewhere in the country, vehemently opposed by industry groups, also flopped. A ballot initiative in Washington state to levy a $15 per ton carbon fee on polluters and invest the revenue in job creation, green infrastructure, and more was defeated 56 to 44 thanks to over $30 million from the oil and gas industry. </div><div>
</div><div>In Arizona, electric utilities spent $31 million against Prop 127, which would have upped the state’s renewable portfolio standard, requiring the power sector to generate at least half its power from renewables by 2030. The proposition was largely bankrolled by liberal donor Tom Steyer via NextGen America, which poured $24 million in support, but it failed resoundingly, garnering just 30 percent of the vote....[more]</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><div>tUESDAY WASN’T AN unambiguous win for the industry, though — even in Colorado. Amendment 74 — polling high before the election and far better than Prop 112 — would have allowed property owners to sue local governments and the state for any infringement on their profits, but fell short of the 55 percent of votes needed to be grafted into Colorado’s constitution. The campaign for Amendment 74 was small compared to the fight against Prop 112 but still sizable, with $11.2 million raised by backers — about $10 million from oil and gas — and $6.3 by opponents under the banner Save Our Neighborhoods.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>Still, one clear takeaway from the midterms ballot initiatives is that fossil fuel money can buy elections. Apparently, $100 million can buy four of them. “They’re putting up big numbers,” said Edgar Franks, a Bellingham-based labor organizer who helped draft and campaign for I-1631 with the environmental justice group Front and Centered. “You can tell that where this is actually a threat to the way that they do business, because they know it’s going to work.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>While Washington Gov. Jay Inslee backed I-1631 — having failed to get his own carbon fee through the legislature this spring — his Colorado counterpart was on the opposite side of the fight in his state. Prop 112 failed amid opposition not just from the oil and gas industry, but also from now-outgoing Colorado governor and former oil industry geologist John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, along with governor-elect Jared Polis and his Republican opponent. The Colorado Democratic Party, however, supported it. Polis’s opposition was ironic, given that he himself had spearheaded the push for a 2,000-foot setback rule several years ago before eventually withdrawing it from the ballot.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Despite Polis’s opposition to Prop 112, Colorado Rising is cautiously optimistic about working with his administration, a position bolstered by the fact that Democrats managed to flip the state legislature last night. “Polis clearly understands that fracking is dangerous near communities,” said Micah Parkin, a board member of Colorado Rising and executive director of 350 Colorado. “He may not agree with us on 2,500 feet, but he clearly gets that it doesn’t belong near our children’s schools and homes and water sources.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The bar for improving Hickenlooper’s record on extraction has been set pretty low. The outgoing governor had threatened to call a special lame duck session of the state legislature in the event of Prop 112’s passage.“ It’s incredibly undemocratic,” said Parkin in advance of the vote. “The very idea that he would think it’s OK to turn around and ignore the will of the people, when thousands of his own constituents have worked so hard.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="">The statement wasn’t unprecedented for Hickenlooper. In 2013, he openly threatened to sue any city that banned fracking within its borders and in fact, did sue Longmont and Fort Collins after they implemented restrictions on fracking. The state’s suit also undermined the legal standing of three other bans and moratoria. “Topics like these,” Nelson told me, “are the ones that enable the true colors of our representatives to come out. It just shows that he’s never been on the side of the people, he’s been on the side of industry.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>Predictably, then, the fight over Proposition 112 got ugly. Oil and gas interests painted the measure as an attempt to ban fracking in the state, though it in fact only added on to policies that already exist, which require a 500-foot setback from homes and 1,000-foot setback from schools. In collecting signatures this summer to get Prop 112 on the ballot, canvassers were followed and surrounded by paid protesters. “It would be between two and four of us who would plan out where to collect signatures,” Nelson said. “We would get there and 15 or 20 minutes later, these kids would show up with their signs. Unless they were following us, how would they know where we were?” She suspects at least some of them were University of Colorado students and had awkward encounters with them around town after encountering them while petitioning.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A political consultant hired by Colorado Rising this summer to help collect signatures also walked out of the state with 15,000 signatures, which were only retrieved after the group filed a lawsuit to have them returned.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The industry also publicly — and knowingly — overstated the impact of the measure. As Denver’s 9News found from a leaked report that industry groups had seen a report from the consultancy RS Energy stating that their losses would be far less than what they projected out over airwaves. The industry-friendly state regulator, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, had instead claimed in July that some 80 percent of non-federal land in Colorado — the only land covered by Prop 112 — would be off-limits to drilling. Yet the RS Energy report shows that companies would maintain access to 61 percent of the state’s oil and gas reserves. That’s partially because although companies would be barred from drilling within setback zones, horizontal drilling techniques — where the well mouth is within permitted drilling areas — could still access minerals under off-limits areas from up to a mile away.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“People have tried so many different ways to protect themselves over the years, and this was the last recourse.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">While it would have been the country’s most ambitious regulatory check on the fossil fuel industry, Parkin and Nelson both emphasized that Prop 112 was a kind of method of last resort. Those looking to place more regulations on the oil and gas industry had tried to get bills passed through the legislature and appealed to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission — all to no avail. “People have tried so many different ways to protect themselves over the years,” Parkin said, “and this was the last recourse.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A supporter of Initiative 1631 holds a sign referencing the Nisqually Indian Tribe, Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2018, during a rally supporting I-1631, a November ballot measure in Washington state that would charge a fee on carbon emissions from fossil fuels. The rally was organized by tribal and environmental leaders, and took place near the offices of the Western States Petroleum Association in Lacey, Wash. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>IT WAS A similar story in Washington, where the legislature failed earlier this year to get a somewhat similar carbon tax measure through the legislature, falling short by “one or two votes.” A 2016 ballot initiative had failed to — by a margin of 20 percent — after drawing fire from the same groups now pushing for I-1631 over its lack of both investment in green projects and attention to the demands of climate and environmental justice groups. The campaign this time around was comparatively massive, drawing in a huge coalition of labor groups, indigenous communities, climate nonprofits, and more.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The biggest limiting factor to commonsense climate policies like Prop 112 and I-1631 isn’t either old school climate denial or bad design, but the sheer force of the fossil fuel industry’s seemingly endless capacity to pour money into elections. While theoretically supportive of carbon pricing and some vague sense of climate action, fossil fuel interests this cycle showed their cards: If it poses a threat to their profits, it’s going down. Fightbacks like the one posed to Amendment 74 are possible. Yet with Democrats taking the House — with several climate hawks now in their ranks — any push on climate there will have to reckon with the colossal funding might of the industry, and the kind of opposition Prop 112 faced from members of their own party sponsored by them.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">On the heels of the latest IPCC report — which makes the need to decarbonize every sector of the economy painfully clear — there isn’t really an alternative to going toe to toe with those companies, no matter how much of a David and Goliath fight it might be.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“This isn’t over for me, personally.  We have had a warning,” Nelson said, referencing that report, “that we either end our dependence on fossil fuels or things are going to get extremely rough for mankind. For me, it shows that it’s just about greed and money for this industry.”</div></div></div>=nat gas berkeley abd <h3 style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.333; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Safety, and Now Climate Change</h3>Just as electric utilities' infrastructure is coming under greater scrutiny amid recent wildfires across the state, aging natural gas infrastructure has been a concern in recent years following catastrophic failures. Five years before the Alison Canyon gas leak released up to 109,000 metric tons of methane, forcing thousands of people living nearby to be relocated, a natural gas pipeline explosion killed eight people in San Bruno."Because of the San Bruno explosion, and then the Aliso Canyon leak, and other issues and [the] liability of energy in southern California in particular, it's becoming evident that we need to really heavily invest in the natural gas pipeline system in order just to maintain safety and reliability," said Bryan Early, the California Energy Commission's chief of staff."At the same time, there is a relatively convincing argument being made that that gas pipeline system is probably incongruous with the state achieving its climate goals, and so we are going to have to reconcile those two."  For some cities, the decision has already been made."We have to move to cleaner sources of energy if we are going to have the emissions reductions that we want to reach," said Ken Davies, deputy director of Climate Smart San José, a climate initiative of the city's environmental services department. "There is really no other choice."San Jose currently gets more than 80 percent of its electricity from clean energy sources, Davies said. A pending ban on natural gas in new low-rise buildings could take effect as soon as January. "It makes sense right now to move away from a fossil fuel," he said.=<a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/welcome-to-amazons-post-truth-society/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/welcome-to-amazons-post-truth-society/</a>no lnx
Welcome to Amazon’s post-truth society
Written by Keith A. Spencer / Salon November 9, 2019This year’s election for Seattle city council was a referendum — not on any issue or party, but on the ability of Amazon, the 13th largest corporation on Earth, to manipulate public opinion and subvert democracy in order to maintain political control over its hometown.Among all seven city council seats that were up for election, there was a pro-Amazon candidate and a candidate that favored populist will over the needs of massive corporations.  Amazon spent money to support seven different candidates, one for each open seat. As you might expect, all of the candidates Amazon backed were neoliberals — an excellent, general political term to refer to these politicians’ collective belief in social liberalism (as long as it doesn’t interfere with the profit margins of corporations) and economic policy of deferring to the ruling elite and their consultant-class lackeys on such policy matters.
Neoliberalism is an anti-democratic political position; it presupposes that the liberal capitalist democratic order maintains some stable state when the ruling class pulls the levers that govern society, and keeps the pesky masses barred from interfering in their accumulation of capital. “[Neoliberalism] means the dismantling of publicly owned industry and deregulation of capital, especially finance capital; the elimination of public provisions and the idea of public goods; and the most basic submission of everything to markets and to unregulated markets,” scholar Wendy Brown told Salon in 2016.
The votes are still being tallied, but relatively speaking, it seems Amazon’s electioneering was partly successful: three pro-Amazon candidates seem all but certain to win election to city council, three seemed destined to lose, and one race is still very much up in the air, the competition between District 3 incumbent Councilmember Kshama Sawant and her competitor Egan Orion.Yet three (or four) victories out of seven is a good outcome for Amazon when you consider their bang-to-buck ratio. Amazon’s revenues last year were $232.8 billion; they spent about $1.5 million backing neoliberal candidates in Seattle, by way of donating to an Orwellian-named political action committee (PAC) called Civic Alliance for a Sound Economy. $1.5 million may sound like a lot to you or me, but it is pocket change for Amazon — 0.00064% of the company’s 2018 revenues. This is the equivalent of someone with a $100,000 annual salary donating 64 cents to a political cause.
Vote tallies continue to come in, but as of publication, three-term Councilmember Kshama Sawant is running a few hundred votes behind Amazon-sponsored Egan Orion, and she may well be unseated. That would suit Amazon’s interests nicely: Sawant’s policy platform was that of a left-populist, and she, like Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, was working to build a democratic coalition to fight for the economic rights of the masses over the “rights” of corporations like Amazon. These include Seattle’s $15-an-hour minimum wage, which Sawant helped usher in; the ongoing fight for comprehensive rent control; and taxes on big corporations to help pay for housing and homelessness services. This kind of people power terrifies corporations and their CEOs, who prefer neoliberal candidates who believe in rule by the elite.
All of this is to say that a corporation’s massive sums of money, when invested in public relations firms to craft a propaganda message, work pretty well. Modern corporations understand that people’s minds are malleable; one only needs the right dosage of industrial-psychological manipulation to sway public opinion.
The fact that the amount of money that Amazon sank into the race spent was a pittance (to them) is important. It means that they know now how much it costs to manipulate public opinion for their own gain. Spending twice as much or even ten times as much on the next city council race would still constitute a rounding error to their accountants — as consequential to Amazon’s bank account as the loss of a single drop of blood is to a blue whale.
Part of the philosophical justification for democracy is that the masses are clever enough to figure out what is best for them and what isn’t. But money is generally the determining factor in who wins an election — or more specifically, the ability of money to pay for propaganda. One of the most important yet under-appreciated academic studies of the past half-decade, a paper by Thomas Ferguson, Paul Jorgensen, and Jie Chen titled “How Money Drives US Congressional Elections,” found a linear correlation between a candidate’s war chest and their probability of victory for all Senate and House elections from 1980 through 2012. In this chart from their paper, the horizontal axis shows the difference between the Democratic and Republican candidates’ campaign money. The vertical axis shows the percentage of votes the Democrat won over their GOP opponent. The correlation is remarkable.
 “The conclusion has to be that spending by major political parties is indeed strongly related to the proportion of votes they win and has been for as long as we have data,” the authors write.
This is all to say that propaganda works incredibly well — and the kinds of propaganda that rich people and industry have the capacity to fund can sway people routinely to vote against their best interests. To use a loaded term, “brainwashing” is real, but it doesn’t look like we think it does, creating vortices over our eyes as we gaze at a candidate. It’s just a function of money.
When I was a kid, I remember my liberal family crowing about conservatives “voting against their best interest.” But it’s not merely conservatives that do this. There’s a selection bias for the kinds of liberal candidates that make it past the Democratic primaries, or the parties that we’re “allowed” to vote for; all of this is controlled, more or less, by the money and influence of these rich people. Industrial psychology is so sophisticated, so sinister, that it is not at all difficult (with money) to manipulate the populace en masse such that they vote for the ruling class’s preferred candidates, whether neoliberal liberals or neoliberal conservatives.
This all goes back to a phrase that’s become in vogue lately: post-truth. We are told we are in a new epoch of American civilization, the post-truth society, where many of us deny facts because we have chosen a different social media reality bubble, or because our dear leader tells us so. We often hear that this phenomenon was uniquely created by Trump and his underlings who aspire to be like him, but particularly by his unique ability to confidently fabricate facts, ideas and policies without blinking.
Yet this Trumpian trait, I think, is more a function of being a rich asshole who has been surrounded his entire life by yes-men than it is due to some kind of nascent political transformation. All billionaires and CEOs are uniquely convinced of their godliness and self-righteousness; just look at Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk, who think that they alone have the fortitude and wisdom to lead humanity to the stars; or Mike Bloomberg or Tom Steyer, who feel they are uniquely situated to decide our political fortunes for us. No, the post-truth society precedes Trump, or any of these men who fund (or become) political candidates. It is something innate to capitalism itself.
Democracy and capitalism are incompatible inasmuch as the rich are given free license to employ public relations teams and marketers — propagandists, largely — to manipulate and dictate public opinion, and sway many to vote against their best interest. They, and their think tanks and assistants and firms, tell us what political positions are realistic, and which are impossible; which candidates are viable or not; which future paths are possible for humanity. It is very difficult to think beyond the specter of the future they set out for us through their media. This extends to art, particularly film and video games — but that story is one best saved for a different article.
In certain western democracies, there is marginally more control over the ability of the rich to influence elections. But the impact of said regulations are marginal at best; even when the rich can’t give to candidates, they often own papers or media outlets, and can, in other ways, subtly dictate the political reality of a nation-state. In other words, you can temper the ways in which capitalism and inequality distort and undermine democracy; but you cannot eliminate it completely so long as its innate class antagonisms remain intact. That means the post-truth society is with us now, as it has always been; it is intrinsic to our economic system.
=<a href="http://www.alternet.org/republicans-several-states-are-lowering-minimum-wage-yes-you-read-right">http://www.alternet.org/republicans-several-states-are-lowering-minimum-wage-yes-you-read-right</a>While journalists and political junkies are focused on the latest implosion of the GOP effort to repeal Obamacare and gut Medicaid, conservatives in several states have been working to decrease the minimum wage that businesses can pay to their workers.In Missouri, Republicans just passed a law overturning a local measure passed by the city of St. Louis that had raised the minimum wage to $10 per hour.The new law will prohibit counties and cities within Missouri from creating their own minimum wage laws. It will also roll back the St. Louis minimum hourly wage to the statewide floor of $7.70.Notably, Gov. Eric Greitens, a Republican, refused to sign the law, even though he spoke out in favor of it. Under the Missouri constitution, bills passed by both houses of the state assembly automatically become law.In a news conference June 30, Greitens focused on procedural objections to the bill. He faulted the Republican-controlled Senate for utilizing a procedural loophole to block a Democratic filibuster of the measure, which had prevented it from being voted on until the final day of the chamber’s legislative session.“I disapprove of the way politicians handled this,” Greitens said, as reported <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/st-louis-minimum-wage-will-revert-back-to-in-august/article_0428b488-d4e2-5778-895b-f44ad92cc65a.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch</a>. “That’s why I won’t be signing my name to their bill.”The governor’s refusal to sign the law was interpreted as an at of cowardice by some Democrats.“Signing it would have shown the fact that he is heartless and that he really doesn’t care about the working poor,” state Sen. Jamilah Nasheed told the Post-Dispatch. “So what he didn’t want to do is sign a bill to take money out of the pockets of those who already have an increase, but still do so.”During the Senate delay, the city ordinance went into effect on May 5. It is unclear how many local businesses will reduce their employees’ wages to $7.70 after paying the higher $10 rate.Missouri is not the only state where Republican elected officials have successfully targeted minimum wage laws. Until recently, such an action seemed like a conservative pipe dream. Thanks to a years-long hollowing out of the Democratic Party in rural and exurban areas, however, right-wing politicians have become able to pursue policies that were once impossible.The GOP effort in Missouri came on the heels of an earlier success in March, when Iowa Republicans managed to roll back mandatory pay increases passed by local jurisdictions. It was <a href="http://www.nelp.org/news-releases/on-iowa-blocking-all-local-minimum-wage-and-employment-benefits-laws/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">the first time such a law had ever been passed</a>, according to the National Employment Law Project, a liberal nonprofit group that supports higher minimum wage laws.Terry Branstad, Iowa’s Republican governor, was decidedly more gung-ho in his response to the idea. He held a formal signing ceremony for the bill and <a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/30/branstad-signs-bills-limiting-workers-compensation-blocking-minimum-wage-hikes/99819450/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">spoke on its behalf</a>, citing his desire for a single wage across the state.<div data-toggle-group="story-14792658" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“I think that uniformity is critically important, especially when you have communities that are in more than one county,” Branstad said as he signed the new law.<div class="in_content_ad_container hide_on_mobile ad_13" style="width: 300px; height: 250px; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); float: left; margin: 0px 15px 15px 0px;"><div class="proper-ad-unit" style="margin: auto; padding-bottom: 25px; position: relative; min-width: 100px; text-align: center; box-sizing: border-box !important;"><div id="proper-ad-alternet_content_2" data-google-query-id="CPvJkpzMgdUCFZB3AQod9WUM4g" style="position: relative; margin: auto; min-width: 300px; min-height: 250px; box-sizing: border-box !important;"><div id="google_ads_iframe/5376056/alternet_content_2_0container" style="border: 0pt none; display: inline-block; width: 300px; height: 250px; box-sizing: border-box !important;"></div></div><a href="http://www.alternet.org/republicans-several-states-are-lowering-minimum-wage-yes-you-read-right#report-ad" data-aid="proper-ad-alternet_content_2" class="call-modal report-ad" style="text-decoration-line: none; left: 0px; right: 0px; line-height: 23px; white-space: nowrap; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; box-sizing: border-box !important; position: absolute !important;">Report Advertisement</a></div></div>In February, Branstad said he did favor “<a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/13/branstad-recommends-minimum-wage-increase-legislature-remains-skeptical/97851102/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">a modest increase</a>” in wages, however.Advocates of lowering the minimum wage have also had success using lawsuits. In October, Kentucky’s Supreme Court overturned a 2014 Louisville ordinance that would have raised the city’s minimum wage to $9 an hour. In <a href="http://wfpl.org/kentucky-supreme-court-strikes-down-louisville-minimum-wage-ordinance/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">a 6-1 ruling</a>, the court ruled that the local law violated the state constitution.Republicans in Maine have also been successful at changing local minimum wage laws. While GOP efforts in other states have been opposed by low-wage workers, in the Pine Tree State, bartenders and restaurant employees appear to have assisted them and a number of Democrats joined in.The unusual coalition behind decreasing wages in Maine highlights one of the emerging controversies in the debate over the minimum wage: whether employees who receive tips should be paid the same minimum wage as those who do not.Under federal law, employers are required to supplement payments to workers who do not earn enough tips to reach the minimum wage threshold. The federal minimum wage for non-tipped employees is $7.25 per hour. Congress has not passed an increase since 2007.<div>Free-market advocates and restaurant industry representatives argue that adding tips onto a full minimum wage will cripple many food establishments by forcing them to raise prices or reduce staffing levels.</div>James Dill, a Democratic state senator in Maine, had resisted that position but changed his mind after he received hundreds of of emails and phone calls from waiters and bartenders asking him to support lowering the amount that tipped workers must be paid.“I believe in a higher minimum wage,” <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/27/maine-tried-to-raise-its-minimum-wage-restaurant-workers-didnt-want-it/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">he told the Washington Post</a>. “But the people who this was impacting didn’t want it.”The measure passed Maine’s House of Representatives 100 to 37 and cleared its Senate 23 to 12. Once it goes into effect in January, the minimum wage for tipped workers will return to the previous state minimum of $3.75 per hour.During his 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump appeared to support <a href="http://www.salon.com/2016/11/14/donald-trumps-progressive-mandate-at-least-on-economics-thats-not-as-crazy-as-it-sounds/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">raising the minimum wage requirement to $10 an hour</a>. Since he assumed office, however, Trump has made no movement toward promoting the idea.According to a <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/335837-poll-bipartisan-majority-supports-raising-minimum-wage" style="text-decoration-line: none;">poll released in June by the University of Maryland</a>, 74 percent of respondents favored increasing the federal minimum wage to $10 per hour. Even 58 percent of self-identified Republicans supported the higher wage.</div>==<a href="http://www.alternet.org/food/fast-food-lobbyists-against-regulation">http://www.alternet.org/food/fast-food-lobbyists-against-regulation</a><a href="http://www.alternet.org/food/fast-food-lobbyists-against-regulation"> </a><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwaters/2017/06/21/soda-and-fast-food-lobbyists-push-state-preemption-laws-to-prevent-local-regulation/#3e39758e745d">Forbes Magazine</a> When

the city council of Santa Fe, New Mexico, placed a measure on the local

ballot to tax sugary drinks earlier this year, the soda industry

responded quickly, pouring $1.3 million into the anti-tax campaign. To

cover their bases, industry lobbyists also pursued a back-up plan: they

backed a bill in the state legislature to strip local governments of the

power to levy such taxes. In the end, the state

language was added to another bill that sailed through the New Mexico

House before dying in a Senate committee, shortly before Santa Fe voters

defeated the local soda tax. But as a growing number of cities consider

and increasingly pass soda taxes and other measures designed to combat

obesity and promote healthy eating, the food industry has turned to a

strategy used extensively by the tobacco and gun lobbies. The

strategy, known as preemption, uses state laws to take away the right

of cities to enact various kinds of regulations, reserving that power to

the state. The tobacco industry used preemption to block or weaken

local ordinances that ban smoking in public spaces. The firearms

industry used it to beat back local efforts to control gun sales.Now,

lobbyists for numerous industries, including soda makers and fast-food

chains, are pushing state laws that block municipal governments from

adopting local controls. Aiding the effort is the American Legislative

Exchange Council (ALEC), a group backed by corporations and conservative

foundations, which brings together state lawmakers and industry

lobbyists to draft and disseminate model legislation.At least nine states have passed nutrition-related preemption laws, according to <a href="http://www.grassrootschange.net">Grassroots Change</a>,

a nonprofit group that monitors state preemption efforts. Others have

adopted measures that keep cities from requiring employers to provide

paid sick leave or nullifying laws that protect gay or transgender

people from discrimination.The federal government can

also preempt state and local law. In recent years, Congress has passed

several bills with preemption provisions, including a revision of the

key 40-year-old federal act regulating chemicals, a law requiring

restaurants to display nutrition information, and another relating to

disclosure of the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food

products. These laws also limit states and cities from regulating the

same products, though each does so in different ways.In 2011, the National Academy of Medicine urged in a <a href="http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/reports/2011/for-the-publics-health-revitalizing-law-and-policy-to-meet-new-challenges/report-brief.aspx">report</a>

that federal and state legislators avoid wording preemptive laws “in a

way that hinders public health action.” But a growing number of state

legislatures are ignoring that plea.A <a href="http://www.azleg.gov/ars/44/01380.htm">2011 Arizona law</a>

bars local governments from regulating restaurant giveaways of toys and

prizes like those given to children eating McDonalds Happy Meals or at

the Chuck E. Cheese pizza chain.Alabama, Florida, Georgia and Utah ban regulations requiring restaurants to publicly display nutritional information. Mississippi

and Ohio bar both these types of regulations and Wisconsin prohibits

cities from restricting food or drink sales based on size, caloric

content or nutritional value.In New Mexico, the soda

tax preemption language was added at the last minute to a 300-page

substitute bill addressing a variety of tax issues, said William

Fulginiti, executive director of the New Mexico Municipal League, an

association representing cities, which opposed the preemption as an

infringement on the rights of local communities. “It

was done quickly. I don’t think they were even aware of what was in the

bill,” Fulginiti said of House members who passed the substitute tax

measure. Fulginiti said the original bill had been supported by The

Coca-Cola Co. and that a Coke lobbyist had visited him to push for the

bill.Sarah Maestas Barnes, the New Mexico legislator

who introduced the original preemption measure, received a $1,000

campaign contribution last year from Admiral Beverage Corp., which

manufactures and distributes Pepsi and other drinks. Barnes didn’t

return several phone calls and emails seeking comment...

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/how-public-trust-principle-can-defend-human-rights-against-fracking">http://www.alternet.org/environment/how-public-trust-principle-can-defend-human-rights-against-fracking</a>...ENVIRONMENT<div class="region region-content"><div id="block-system-main" class="block block-system first last odd count-1" style="position: relative;"><div class="content"><div id="node-1077661" class="node node-story view-mode-full clearfix=" about="/environment/how-public-trust-principle-can-defend-human-rights-against-fracking" typeof="sioc:Item foaf:Document" style="position: relative;"><div class="headline"><h1 class="node-title" style="line-height: 52px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; clear: both;">How the Public Trust Principle Can Defend Human Rights Against Fracking</h1></div><div class="teaser" style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; margin-bottom: 15px;"><div class="field field-name-field-teaser field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Pure drinking water and breathable air are not privileges bestowed upon citizens by the government, but the rightful property of the people.</div></div></div></div><div class="byline environment" style="margin-bottom: 0px; max-width: 350px; float: left;">By <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/mary-christina-wood" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Mary Christina Wood</a>, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/rance-shaw" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Rance Shaw</a> / <a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Center for Humans and Nature</a></div><div class="story-date" style="float: left; margin-left: 20px; padding-left: 15px; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">June 1, 2017, 12:00 PM GMT</div><div class="story-date" style="float: left; margin-left: 20px; padding-left: 15px; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">
</div><div class="the_body body_environment clearfix" style="line-height: 25px;">In her essay, “The View From 31,000 Feet: A Philosopher Looks at Fracking,” Kathleen Dean Moore posits there is a “human right to the material conditions of ongoing life, including clean water, clean air, and nontoxic soil.”<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_1" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[1]</a> She describes the insatiable and constant taking of the fracking industry, demanding “land, livelihood, public property, private property, highway rights of way, democracy, health, sea beds, birdsong, silence, and the thriving of our children.”So, then, how does (or should) the law restrain fracking, which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has called “history seeming to repeat itself: an industry, offering the very real prospect of jobs and other important economic benefits, seek[ing] to exploit” public resources?<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_2" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[2]</a>The public trust doctrine, an ancient but evolving principle, shifts the legal paradigm from one of political discretion to one of fiduciary obligation. Thisprinciple “ranks so fundamental to citizens” that scholars commonly describe it as protecting core human rights.<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_3" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[3]</a>Statutory discretion in natural resource managementIn the 1970s, at the inception of the modern environmental era, Congress passed the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Forest Management Act, and other key statutes in response to broad public demands for regulation. Over the ensuing decades, however, powerful industries have largely captured regulatory agencies, bending such agencies to industries’ own economic interests. Whereas Congress passed environmental statutes with the overriding goal of protecting the environment, the environmental agencies now predominantly use the statutes to legalize destruction of the environment. For example, as a 2006 Congressional Research Service brief revealed, less than 0.3 percent of the 85,000 yearly wetlands permit applications are denied under the Clean Water Act.<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_4" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[4]</a>Congress too promotes environmental damage. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 contains the now-infamous “Halliburton Loophole,” which essentially exempts fracking from the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and CERCLA.Unable to rely on federal agency or congressional protection, some local governments have taken measures to curtail fracking within their limited jurisdictional boundaries. In some states, like Colorado, the Supreme Court has ruled that local fracking bans are preempted when there is a conflicting state statute.<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_5" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[5]</a> But in Pennsylvania, a state with an Environmental Rights Amendment to the constitution, the Supreme Court ruled that the legislature could not enact laws preventing protections of “resources essential to life, health, and liberty.”<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_6" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[6]</a> In a plurality opinion, Chief Justice Castille wrote that the local governments had a public trust duty to safeguard essential resources, and that the state legislature could not deprive the local government of the means to carry out that duty. The reasoning applies to other states as well. The Public Trust Doctrine, as a fundamental attribute of sovereignty, offers a different legal framework in which political discretion succumbs to fiduciary obligation.The public trust principleThe Public Trust Doctrine dates to the ancient Roman Institutes of Justinian. The doctrine has three tenets: government is trustee, current and future generations of citizens are co-beneficiaries, and crucial natural resources comprise the corpus of an enduring ecological trust. In the seminal American Public Trust Doctrine case, Illinois Central Railroad, Co. v. Illinois, the United States Supreme Court said that lands below navigable waters (the traditional trust property) are held in trust by the government because they are “a subject of public concern to the whole people of the State.”<a href="http://www.humansandnature.org/enforcing-human-rights-against-fracking-through-the-public-trust-principle#ftn_7" style="text-decoration-line: none;">[7]</a> Likewise, ground waters, air, and atmosphere—resources threatened by fracking—are essential to the citizenry.The trust principle has constitutional underpinnings and carries the legal force necessary to overcome even statutory law in compelling circumstances. As trustee, all levels of government must abide by fiduciary duties, some of which require affirmative action, whereas others proscribe certain actions.Case law reflects trust duties that are both substantive and procedural. The six substantive duties require a trustee to: (1) protect the corpus; (2) conserve the natural inheritance of future generations; (3) maximize the societal value of natural resources; (4) restore the trust corpus where it has been damaged; (5) recover natural resource damages from third parties that have injured public trust assets; and (6) refrain from privatizing trust resources except in limited circumstances...
.</div></div></div></div></div>4. The <a href="https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/planning2" style="text-decoration: none;">Planning 2.0</a> rule: Issued by the BLM and aimed at protecting the voice of local communities in public lands management decisions.<ul><li>Benefits and Costs: <a href="https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/PlanningandNepa_Planning_FinalPlanningRuleEconomicAnalysis.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">No definitive costs or benefits</a>: “[T]he final rule affects the procedures used to develop resource management plans, but would not directly affect the land management decisions themselves. As a result, none of the changes will result in direct monetary impacts on any individual or group.”</li><li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Following the money: According to MapLight.org, mining, livestock, and oil and gas industry opponents of the rule have donated $802,507 to members of Congress sponsoring the resolution to repeal the rule. Among the most vocal opponents of the rule is the Western Energy Alliance, a trade association representing oil and gas companies in the West, which <a href="https://www.westernenergyalliance.org/knowledge-center/land/land-use-plans" style="text-decoration: none;">opposed</a> nearly every land management and energy reform initiative of the Obama administration.</li></ul>The striking commonality among these rules is the scale of the campaign contributions and the political connections of the affected industries to the sponsors of the legislation. Thus far, industries that have succeeded in having Congress overturn an environmental rule have donated an average of $2.3 million to the sponsors of the CRA resolutions in both chambers.<div>=</div><div>1/17</div><div>
</div><div>The head of the city department that drafts many of San Francisco’s greenest rules and regulations uses one word to explain her greatest fear for the environment during Donald Trump’s presidency: “preemption.”</div><div>
</div>If some of the deepest concerns of climate-focused bureaucrats from San Francisco to Massachusetts and New York come true, the Trump administration will preemptively prevent them from acting to slow global warming.With Trump and Republicans in Congress widely expected to unite to undermine federal environmental protections, progressive states and cities are making plans to fight global warming within their borders without being helped or required to do so by the U.S. government.“Preemption is probably the progressive cities’ worst nightmare,” said <a href="http://sfmayor.org/article/mayor-lee-appoints-deborah-raphael-sf-environment-director" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration: none;">Deborah Raphael</a>, director of San Francisco’s environment department, which has helped city lawmakers craft rules mandating everything from greener buildings to composting and recycling by residents. “It’s also the state of California’s worst nightmare.”The term “preemption” doesn’t describe a single legislative or regulatory tool. The word describes a concept, in which the federal government or a state imposes restrictions on the rules and programs that governments operating beneath it are allowed to implement.Conservative lawmakers in North Carolina used a preemption law last year to <a href="http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article68401147.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">outlaw transgender protections</a> in Charlotte. In <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/30/yes-this-is-real-michigan-just-banned-banning-plastic-bags/?utm_term=.e33f91ad9733" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Michigan, cities and counties</a> were barred from banning plastic bags. Colorado <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/2016/05/02/colorado-supreme-court-rules-state-law-trumps-local-bans-on-fracking/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">prevents local governments</a> from banning fracking.With Republicans about to control both houses of Congress and the White House, environmental experts are warning of battles ahead over potential federal preemptions.“There really is virtually no aspect of federal regulation of the natural environment or health that’s not at risk of preemption now,” said <a href="http://grassrootschange.net/mark-pertschuk/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Mark Pertschuk</a>, a lawyer and activist with the nonprofit Grassroots Change, which <a href="http://grassrootschange.net/preemption-map/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">tracks state preemptions</a> of local rules affecting gun safety, paid sick days, factory farming and other issues. “Federal laws almost always trump state and local laws.”It’s difficult to predict when, how or whether the federal government will wield any tools of preemption to bar cities and states from enforcing their own environmental rules. Nonetheless, governments across the country are bracing for new restrictions. California’s decision to hire Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder Jr., showed <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/us/california-eric-holder-donald-trump.html?r=0" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">it’s preparing to fight</a> for state rights in court.“Everything is speculative right now,” said <a href="http://www.nlc.org/find-city-solutions/city-solutions-and-applied-research/staff-specialties" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Cooper Martin</a>, a sustainability official at the National League of Cities, which represents cities in state capitols and on Capitol Hill. Based on Trump’s <a href="http://www.climatecentral.org/news/trump-cabinet-climate-change-20920" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">anti-environmental cabinet nominees</a> and his rhetoric on climate change, which he has falsely called a hoax, Martin said fears of federal preemption are “certainly well founded.”“It’s just the nature of the political landscape that this hasn’t been an issue on climate, at least in the last eight years,” Martin said, referring to the length of Obama’s presidency. “It was certainly an issue prior to that.”Clean car rules in California, which are unpopular with oil companies and auto manufacturers, offer what may be the clearest opportunity for federal preemption. Other rules that could be blocked relate to appliance efficiency standards, power plant pollution, fossil fuel exports and safe disposal of pharmaceuticals. Local governments that have spent federal transportation funds on cycling and transit initiatives could be prevented from doing so in the future.“Programs that allow cities to invest in bike and pedestrian infrastructure, or that allow cities to invest in transit, have all become more popular, particularly in the larger cities,” Martin said. “We want to make sure that there’s flexibility for the cities that do choose to go down this path.”The Clean Air Act allows California to enforce stricter standards on car pollution than the federal government. It also allows other states to adopt California’s rules. But to do so, California needs a waiver from the EPA. When George W. Bush was president, the EPA refused to issue such a waiver, which was eventually granted after Obama became president.Trump’s nominee to lead the EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, has <a href="http://www.climatecentral.org/news/trump-picks-strident-foe-of-epa-20949" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">repeatedly sued the agency</a>, arguing that federal pollution rules violate state rights. Now he might lead a charge to limit the rights of states to enforce their own pollution rules to slow climate change.Within days of Trump’s election, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers <a href="http://www.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA1078111110.PDF" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">sent the president-elect a letter</a> arguing that the “regulatory friction” caused by two sets of car pollution standards is “driving up vehicle costs.” The automakers implored Trump to eliminate California’s far-reaching clean car rules through what they call “harmonization” with federal regulations.“We could see the U.S. EPA refuse to grant future waivers; there’s even been some talk that they could try to strip away existing waivers,” said <a href="http://www.ccair.org/our-people/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Bill Magavern</a>, the policy director at the Coalition for Clean Air, a California nonprofit. “It’s safe to say California would sue in either instance.”<a href="https://law.stanford.edu/directory/michael-wara/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Michael Wara</a>, an energy and environment expert at Stanford Law School, said the federal government could go further than car standards and try to revoke the rights of states to limit heat-trapping carbon dioxide pollution billowed by power plants. It could also jeopardize “anything that smells like foreign policy” by states, Wara said, including linkages between a carbon pricing system operated jointly by California and Quebec.“Anything that looks and feels like a treaty — that creates binding obligations on both sides — is going to face increased judicial scrutiny,” Wara said. “Here, if there is any conflict, the state loses.”Not all talk of federal preemption is hypothetical. Rep. Michael Burgess, a Republican from Texas, <a href="http://www.eenews.net/assets/2017/01/05/document_gw_14.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">introduced a bill last week</a> that would repeal federal efficiency standards affecting washing machines, dryers, ceiling fans, fridges and other appliances. It would also prevent states from adopting any product standards governing “energy conservation or water efficiency.”The Heritage Foundation, an influential conservative think tank, supports Burgess’s anti-regulatory drive on appliances, but it’s worried that his bill would curtail state rights.“We don’t believe the federal government should mandate energy conservation,” said <a href="http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/l/nicolas-loris" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Nicolas Loris</a>, a Heritage Foundation energy and environmental policy fellow who has analyzed Burgess’s bill. “But we don’t think the federal government should prohibit the states from doing so.”<div></div>split decision?<a href="http://www.alternet.org/food/local-governments-can-prohibit-ge-crops-says-us-court-appeals">http://www.alternet.org/food/local-governments-can-prohibit-ge-crops-says-us-court-appeals</a>U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decisions Friday on whether federal and Hawai'i state laws preempt Hawai'i counties' authority to regulate <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/gmos" style="text-decoration: none;">genetically engineered</a> (GE) crops and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides" style="text-decoration: none;">pesticide</a> use. Of significance to state and local communities throughout the U.S., the Ninth Circuit ruled that federal law—specifically, the Plant Protection Act—does not prohibit states and counties from passing local laws to regulate and ban commercially-grown GE crops."Today's decision to allow states and counties to ban or regulate GE crops is an important victory for GE-free seed sanctuaries and small communities and farmers around the country," George Kimbrell, senior attorney for the <a href="http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Center for Food Safety</a>, said.In granting its decision the court recognized potential harm to farmers and environment from the widespread planting of GE crops, asserting, "the cultivation and testing of GE plants raise several well-documented concerns." Notably, the court affirmed, "transgenic contamination has previously caused significant economic impacts on farmers of conventional, non-GE crops."The court acknowledged as well that "the cultivation of GE crops also may raise environmental concerns, such as harm to beneficial plants and animals caused by the increased use of pesticides sometimes associated with testing and growing GE crops, the proliferation of '<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/superweeds" style="text-decoration: none;">superweeds</a>' and other pests resistant to pesticides, and the reduction of biodiversity." The court went on to declare: "The regulation of commercialized crops, both of GE and traditional varieties, remains within the authority of state and local governments."At the same time, however, the court ruled that under Hawai'i law, counties and municipalities do not have the authority to regulate GE crops (as some in other states do), and that Hawai'i state law places such authority in the hands of the State alone."We're disappointed that the court misinterpreted Hawai'i law and concluded the Hawai'i legislature decided Hawai'i counties lack any such authority," <a href="http://earthjustice.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Earthjustice</a> attorney Paul Achitoff said. "The legislature did not, and the decision leaves Hawai'i unprotected from the harms the Ninth Circuit acknowledged. We believe that when Hawai'i's state courts have an opportunity, they will reject the Ninth Circuit's conclusion on this point and allow Hawai'i's people to protect themselves, since the State certainly hasn't protected them."The court also ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) alone has the authority to regulate field trials and experimental GE crops; neither states nor local governments can ban or approve. This is particularly troubling to communities in Hawai'i, since the many field trials and associated pesticide use in Hawai'i poses significant risks to local citizens and the environment"We are extremely disappointed with the ruling that some experimental GE field trials can only be regulated by USDA, and are considering all legal options. Most importantly, we continue to stand and fight with the people of Hawaiʻi against these chemical companies," Kimbrell said.Attorneys with Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice, who represented local residents, conservation groups, and Hawai'i County in the proceedings, are analyzing the full scope of the court's decisions and will be considering options that would protect Hawai'i's people, farms and the environment."As a mother and a resident of Kekaha, Kauaʻi, I will continue to stand up and protect my family and my community," said Malia Kahale'ina Chun, a mother, educator and Native Hawaiian cultural practitioner. "It is our responsibility to insure that our keiki have access to clean air, clean water and to 'āina that sustains them."=<a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/plastic-bag-lobby">http://www.alternet.org/environment/plastic-bag-lobby</a>When the tiny, picturesque community of Bisbee, Arizona, decided to ban single-use plastic bags in 2014, leaders in the plastics industry worried Bisbee had sparked a trend. Other Arizona cities—Kingman, Flagstaff, Tempe—were considering similar restrictions; soon, the bag makers feared, the whole state would fall. So they did what corporate lobbyists do in a reliably conservative state: They persuaded legislators and the governor to declare bans like Bisbee’s illegal.Next door in deep blue California, where more than <a href="http://www.cawrecycles.org/list-of-local-bag-bans/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">150 local jurisdictions</a> have already banned the bags, defending the market sector of the single-use plastic bag has proved altogether more complicated. Sixty percent of polled Californians say they support a plastic bag ban; rescinding the existing bans would be impossible. So instead the industry put its muscle into holding off a statewide ban.For a while, it succeeded. Assemblymember Julia Brownley authored <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1951-2000/ab_1998_bill_20100827_amended_sen_v94.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">a bill </a>in 2010 that would have outlawed single-use carryout bags of any material; it failed in the Senate after the Virginia-based American Chemistry Council worked hard to defeat it. But in 2014, State Senators Alex Padilla, Kevin de León and Ricardo Lara collaborated on a less restrictive law, one that would ban most plastic bags but allow grocery stores to charge 10 cents for each paper replacement. It earned the support of the California Grocers Association, and eventually the United Food and Commercial Workers union. It allows for the continued use of thicker plastic bags that will last for 125 uses or more and directs $2 million in loans to job creation in the recycled and reusable grocery bag industry. In August of that year, the bill made it all the way to the governor’s desk.So the bag lobby pursued its last available option. Before 2014 was out, the plastics lobby had <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Makers-of-plastic-bags-gather-signatures-to-5984107.php" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">collected enough signatures</a> to place the plastic-bag ban, Senate Bill 270, on hold and put it to a referendum on the November 8, 2016 ballot.“Our contention is that it’s a special-interest giveaway to grocers in the state,” says Jon Berrier, spokesman for the American Progressive Bag Alliance, a consortium of mostly out-of-state plastic-bag manufacturers and an offshoot of the American Chemistry Council. “It bans a 100-percent recyclable product produced in America with American labor, that according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency accounts for only 0.3 percent of the waste stream.“The idea that you’re going to reduce waste or litter banning plastic retail bags,” he says, “is simply false. Sacramento special-interest politics threw data and science out the window.”Berrier is right that plastic bags account for only a small percentage of our garbage. (The vast majority of it is <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/smm_graphic_msw_generation_rates.jpg" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">paper, yard trimmings and food</a>.) But single-use plastic retail bags are a singularly pernicious kind of trash. Easily airborne, they float away from conscientious neatnik and litterbug alike, to find their way into mountain streams, storm drain culverts, ocean gyres and, eventually, the gullets of marine animals from cetaceans to sea birds. Sea turtles mistake them for jellyfish and suffer <a href="https://youtu.be/csfQ6StBWcU" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">excruciating deaths by starvation</a>; pelicans spear through them and strangle. On a recent paddle down the Los Angeles River, I saw white plastic bags clinging to the trees; my fellow kayakers playfully dubbed them “grocery-bag flowers.”Plastic bags can be <a href="http://charmeck.org/mecklenburg/county/news/Pages/New-Recycling-Campaign-Aims-for-Increase-in-Plastic-Bags-and-Wraps.aspx" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">recycled</a> at special, dedicated facilities, but you can’t just toss them into a blue bin. Sent to ordinary processing centers, they clog up sorting screens and have to be cut out with <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-plastic-bag-ban-recycling-0731-biz-20150730-story.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">hook knives and saws</a>. They don’t degrade, but disintegrate, turning ocean and freshwater into a diluted chemical soup.But they are also big business, earning their manufacturers $100 million to $150 million every year in California alone. The short list of generous contributors to the No on 67 campaign contains only one in-state individual or company, <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Durabag_Co.,Inc." target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Durabag</a> of Tustin, California, which contributed a mere $50,000 early on. The rest of the donors list consists of out-of-state companies whose futures depend on the persistence of their industry: Advance Polybag of Sugar Land, Texas ($946,833); Formosa Plastics of Livingston, New Jersey ($1,148,441); Hilex Plastics of Hartsville, South Carolina ($2,783,739); Superbag of Houston, Texas ($1,238,188).It has already been money well spent, and not just because a victory in the nation’s bellwether state could set a trend, while a loss could spread bag bans like a virus. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, simply by delaying Padilla’s bill for 18 months, the industry has bagged $15 million in profit.Steve Maviglio, a spokesperson for the Yes on 67 campaign that supports the ban, says that the plastics lobby’s concern over the predicted job losses rings hollow, considering that almost no single-use plastic bags are made in California. The thicker plastic bags allowed in Padilla’s law will, on the other hand, add to the state’s manufacturing economy, adding several hundred jobs. The plastic industry’s claim of <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/bag-732835-plastic-ban.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">2,000 jobs lost</a> “is incredible and nonsense,” Maviglio says.The plastics lobby could, however, win this one—not least because the wording of the referendum on the ballot is confusing. “It’s not intuitive that we need to vote ‘Yes’ for the law to go into effect,” says Diz Swift, a member of the League of Women Voters in Berkeley. “People might say, ‘Oh, no, I don’t want the law vetoed, I want it to go into effect,’ and mistakenly vote ‘No.’” (To be clear, a “No” vote on Proposition 67 will overturn the bag ban; a “Yes” will uphold it.)Even more confusing is that the plastic bag alliance has put another proposition on the ballot – Proposition 65 – that would direct the 10-cent bag fee toward a special wildlife conservation fund. Berrier says the measure came out of the bag alliance’s research. “Only 25 percent of the people we asked had any idea where that 10 cent bag fee would go,” he says. “A lot of people thought it was going to the environment, or to local government.” When they find out it’s going back to the grocers, he says, “They’re outraged. They want it to go to an environmental purpose.”To Swift, however, putting Proposition 65 on the ballot above Proposition 67 is a blatant attempt to skew the vote. Only the most sophisticated and well-informed voters will understand what it all means. “The money goes into a fund that sounds really good,” she says. “It’s for drought mitigation, clean drinking water, regional parks, litter removal and habitat restoration. But it requires creating a bureaucracy that doesn’t really help.”Maviglio is more blunt. “We call 65 the Screw the Grocers Initiative,” he says flatly. “They’re trying to send a message to grocers in other states who would hop aboard a statewide ban.” Single-use bags cost grocers anywhere from six to 16 cents per bag, “and that doesn’t include delivery and stocking,” Maviglio claims. “There’s no windfall there.”If that’s not persuasive enough, he asks voters to consider the source. Prohibitions against plastic bags have been carried by the most grassroots of efforts—community organizations, moms, local environmental groups. The Arizona ban on plastic-bag bans, he says, comes straight out of the <a href="https://www.alec.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">American Legislative Exchange Council</a>, a think tank that assists corporations in state lawmaking, with an emphasis on <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/03/13060/barring-plastic-bag-bans-another-alec-bill-takes-aim-local-democracy" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">preempting local control</a>.“The plastics industry has no regard for the environment,” Maviglio says. “It would be hypocritical of them to put something on the ballot to help wildlife.”To be fair, Berrier doesn’t argue that helping wildlife is the point: The goal of Prop 65, he says, is only to highlight where the bag-fee money goes after grocers collect it.“The language is very plain and simple,” he insists, “and it will have its intended effect.”==

=<a href="https://movetoamend.org/corporate-rule-examples-2">https://movetoamend.org/corporate-rule-examples-2</a><h2 dir="ltr" style="margin: 0.8em 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">State Denies Texas Community’s Anti-Fracking Rights</h2>The elections of November 2014 brought anti-fracking triumphs in Ohio and California communities, but the ultimate victory was won in the city of Denton, Texas.  Denton is the most heavily fracked community in the U.S. with 275 urban wells. It sits above the Barnett shale and is considered the birthplace of this mining technology.  The vote was a convincing 59% in favor despite the oil and gas corporations outspending supporters ten to one in this heavily Republican city.<a name="1" id="1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">[1]</a>These votes in support of local bans encouraged opponents of hydraulic fracturing everywhere. It’s estimated that more than 15 million Americans live within a mile of an oil or gas fracking well.<a name="1" id="1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">[1]</a> Hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracking or “fracking” involves the high-pressure injection of millions of gallons of chemical-laced water and sand into deep rock formations setting free oil or natural gas that can’t be captured through conventional drilling.Frack Free Denton, a citizen group, said: “Simply put, without the ban, fracking will continue unchecked all across Denton less than 200 feet from homes, schools and playgrounds. The negative health and safety impacts of living close to fracking are well established. Fracking requires heavy truck traffic, poses risks of industrial-scale accidents, uses undisclosed proprietary chemicals, and has permanently contaminated over one billion gallons of Denton’s fresh water.”[<a name="3" id="3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">3]</a>
Community activists used creative means against their well-funded adversaries, captivating residents through puppet shows, flash-mob dances, original tunes by the Frackettes trio, and coffin races.<h3 dir="ltr" style="margin: 0.8em 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Fracking Bans Banned by Texas Legislature and Governor</h3>The oil and gas corporations and their industry-wide front groups, the Texas Oil and Gas Association and the Texas Land Office, immediately rose up to whine, initiating a lawsuit against the ban claiming it is “inconsistent with state law and therefore violates the Texas Constitution.”<a name="2" id="2" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[2]</a> But that legal assault on a community’s right to define its future and protect its citizens’ health and safety will not be necessary.  State’s lawmakers passed and Governor Greg Abbott signed a law in mid-May 2015 declaring null and void Denton’s hard-fought victory by forbidding and preempting local laws against fracking.pix  Texas fracking wells.Despite a Texas Home Rule Law that grants local jurisdictions authority to zone-out industrial activity deemed harmful, this recent law subordinates the people to corporate authority. It denies citizens the power to protect their community. Corporations and their complicit politicians claim that such democratically defined protections take away corporate “rights.”  Indeed, U.S. courts granted corporations plenty of legal rights and powers over the past 200 years—rights associated with their property and profits that gave them great power over people, workers and nature--rights equal to those of “persons under law.” More recently, the Supreme Court granted corporations and wealthy individuals the right to donate without limit in our electoral campaigns. Corporate actors used and use these illegitimate “rights” to foil people’s self-governance. The corporate initiated lawsuit against Denton’s fracking ban is merely the most recent assault on our diminished democracy.“It was the oil and gas industry’s contempt for impacted residents that pushed Denton voters to ban fracking… and now the oil and gas industry, through state lawmakers, has doubled down by showing every city in Texas that same contempt,”[<a name="4" id="4" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">4]</a> said Sharon Wilson of Earthworks and a Texas organizer for the Denton ban.Move to Amend applauds the people of Denton for building a movement to assert the community’s rightful self-governing authority. MTA’s national grassroots work seeks to legalize such actions, end corporate rule, and make democracy real.To learn more:<a href="https://movetoamend.org/corporate-rule-examples-2#1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">1.</a> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/05/birthplace-fracking-boom-votes-ban-denton-texas" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/05/birthplace-fracking-boom-votes-ban-denton-texas</a><a href="https://movetoamend.org/corporate-rule-examples-2#2" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">2.</a> <a href="http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/27272660/denton-residents-could-ban-fracking-in-historic-vote" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/27272660/denton-residents-could-ban-fracking-in-historic-vote</a><a href="https://movetoamend.org/corporate-rule-examples-2#3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">3.</a> <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/election-2014-fracking-bans-ballot" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">http://www.commondreams.org/election-2014-fracking-bans-ballot</a><a href="https://movetoamend.org/corporate-rule-examples-2#4" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">4.</a> <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/05/19/banning-fracking-bans-texas-picks-gas-drillers-over-local-democracy" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/05/19/banning-fracking-bans-texas-picks-gas-drillers-over-local-democracy</a><div>
</div>816<p id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472063129820_2314" style="-webkit-padding-start: 0px; margin: 0.9em 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.6; font-family: " helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" arial="Arial" lucida="Lucida" grande="Grande" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">the St. Petersburg City Council is considering a proposed ordinance that would abolish super PACs and limit foreign corporate money in local elections. But the city cannot do it alone—that is why we are reaching out to our supporters across the country to help St. Petersburg with this important initiative.<p id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472063129820_2316" style="-webkit-padding-start: 0px; margin: 0.9em 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.6; font-family: " helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" arial="Arial" lucida="Lucida" grande="Grande" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">If St. Petersburg passes this ordinance, <a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=riq6ELYtWVmGTRc%2BN%2BWHhIvSjMqOh2O6" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472063129820_2315" style="-webkit-padding-start: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; background: transparent;">which we introduced on July 21st</a>, and then faces a legal challenge, this could be the case that ends super PACs altogether and rolls back Citizens United. may 2016<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="239" data-total-count="239" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Colorado’s Supreme Court on Monday struck down local government prohibitions on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, handing <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/energy-environment/oil-petroleum-and-gasoline/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier" title="More articles about oil." class="meta-classifier">oil</a> and gas companies a victory in a lengthy battle over energy production in the environmentally conscious state.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="190" data-total-count="429" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">In separate <a href="https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Case_Announcements/">rulings</a>, the court said a moratorium in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/us/%3Cb%3Ecolorado%3C/b%3E-cities-rejection-of-fracking-poses-political-test-for-natural-gas-industry.html">Fort Collins </a>and a ban in<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="190" data-total-count="429" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/us/with-ban-on-fracking-colorado-town-lands-in-thick-of-dispute.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/us/with-ban-on-fracking-colorado-town-lands-in-thick-of-dispute.html</a><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="190" data-total-count="429" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/us/with-ban-on-fracking-colorado-town-lands-in-thick-of-dispute.html">Longmont</a> were invalid because state law pre-empted them. A lower court had reached the same conclusion earlier.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="253" data-total-count="682" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Two other cities and Boulder County have prohibitions on fracking that presumably are affected by the decisions. With oil and gas exploration in a slump nationwide, the short-term effect of the rulings in Colorado will be small, industry officials said.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="230" data-total-count="912" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">But when the slump ends, activity in urban areas across the Front Range — the eastern foothills of the Rocky Mountains and Colorado’s most populous region, where oil and gas production is concentrated — could be significant.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="224" data-total-count="1136" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">The land opened to exploration by Monday’s rulings is comparatively small. More significant, said experts on both sides of the conflict, is that the rulings shut down future efforts to stop fracking in local jurisdictions.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="231" data-total-count="1367" id="story-continues-1" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Officials of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association said the decisions go beyond prohibitions on oil and gas operations, preventing localities from imposing any rules on those operations that conflict with state laws and regulations.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="333" data-total-count="1700" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Colorado’s regulation of oil and gas production is the most stringent in the nation, said Dan Haley, the association’s president. “This continues to protect citizens and continues to protect the water and air in Colorado, but allows our operators to develop natural resources that have been off-limits for a number of years.”<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="188" data-total-count="1888" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Officials in Fort Collins and Longmont said they were disappointed by the rulings. Environmental groups said the rulings would give new momentum to efforts to force a statewide referendum.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="304" data-total-count="2192" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">The Supreme Court has approved signature-collecting efforts for three fracking-related ballot initiatives; the two most significant would effectively reinstate local control over fracking and other activities, and outlaw fracking within 2,500 feet of occupied buildings, waterways and public open spaces.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="354" data-total-count="2546" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Supporters must gather nearly 100,000 signatures by August for each of the initiatives to place them on the November ballot. “I think this is definitely going to add fuel to the fire for folks to get out there and help get these initiatives passed,” said Lauren Petrie, a senior organizer at Food and Water Watch in Colorado, an opponent of fracking.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="177" data-total-count="2723" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Spurred by the rise of hydraulic fracturing, Colorado has become one of the nation’s largest producers of oil and gas. The state has more than 50,000 active oil and gas wells.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="349" data-total-count="3072" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Environmental advocates say that the Front Range oil and gas boom has contributed significantly to an ozone haze that sometimes blankets the area, and that a coming report will show that well leaks of methane, a greenhouse gas, are common. They also argue that the chemicals used in fracking can leach into water and pose significant health hazards.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="174" data-total-count="3246" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Mr. Haley, of the oil and gas association, said Colorado’s strict rules have led to a reduction in pollution from wells even as oil and gas production rose in recent years.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="391" data-total-count="3637" id="story-continues-2" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Colorado is one of several states where the oil and gas industry has faced citizen-led efforts to ban fracking. New York has banned fracking statewide, and Pennsylvania has granted local government authority over hydraulic fracturing. The Texas Legislature responded last year to one city’s ban on fracking with a law that pre-empts local control over a broad range of drilling activities.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="155" data-total-count="3792" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Gov. Jerry Brown of California came out against a fracking ban last year, but advocacy groups are waging a statewide campaign to place a ban on the ballot.<div class="flex-candidate" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="196" data-total-count="3988" data-node-uid="1" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">“It’s 2 to 2, and California’s still in play,” said Bruce Baizel, the energy program director for Earthworks, an environmental advocacy group that focuses on mining and energy exploration. alec 2016 confLegislators rubbing elbows with so-called "tort reform" lobbyists will be told about "Lawsuits in the Age of Big Data: Bringing Discovery Reform to the States." A presentation titled "The Threat of Groupthink in Jury Decision-Making" will teach them about perceived problems with the democratic check on the criminal justice process, the right to a trial by jury.ALEC's Local Offshoot ACCE: Defer Local Decisions to the StatesALEC's project, the American City County Exchange, is ostensibly meant to be a municipal version of ALEC.ALEC reliably leans on rhetoric about local control in its opposition to federal policies. But ACCE's "<a href="https://www.alec.org/app/uploads/2016/07/3rdANNUALMEETING-1.pdf" target="blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">model bills</a>" are strangely bifurcated between seizing and abandoning local power.On the one hand, ACCE's <a href="https://www.alec.org/model-policy/an-ordinance-for-local-coordination-on-federal-regulations/" target="blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">Ordinance for Local Coordination on Federal Regulations</a> demands local control over federal land-use and environmental policies. A workshop on "24- hour building permits" looks poised to justify limiting democratically adopted rules governing building codes, purportedly in order to encourage "economic growth." Meanwhile, the workshop "Right to Work or Not, Taxpayers Come First" tries on new rhetoric to peddle limits on collective bargaining for local government workers.Yet ACCE just as often urges municipalities to turn decision-making power over to the states. This is likely because cities are at the forefront of progressive policy-making, as with the incredibly popular efforts to raise the minimum wage and expand access to earned sick days. Indeed, as CMD <a href="http://www.exposedbycmd.org/2016/04/04/exposed-most-ceos-support-paid-sick-leave-increased-minimum-wage-and-more-but-chamber-lobbyists-told-how-to-combat-these-measures/" target="blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">documented</a>, most CEOs support those measures by overwhelming majorities, even though business lobbies routinely claim companies oppose such legislation.ACCE's <a href="https://www.alec.org/model-policy/an-ordinance-to-repeal-personal-property-tax-collection/" target="blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">Ordinance to Repeal Personal Property Tax Collection</a> would interfere with cities like San Francisco, which is <a href="http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Airbnb-furniture-tax-generates-120-000-for-8399617.php" target="blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">experimenting with</a> ways to tax property in short-term HomeAway-type rentals similarly to hotels.ACCE's <a href="https://www.alec.org/model-policy/a-local-resolution-in-support-of-state-minimum-wage-law/" target="_blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">Local Resolution in Support of State Minimum Wage Law</a> even urges city officials to claim that the "do not have the authority" to set minimum wages that are appropriate to the conditions in the cities they were elected to represent.

Peddling Harmful Myths, From Guns to Climate<a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2016/6/28/headlines/report_finds_surge_in_dark_money_at_state_and_local_level">http://www.democracynow.org/2016/6/28/headlines/report_finds_surge_in_dark_money_at_state_and_local_level</a>A new report has found a surge in the use of dark money donations at the state and local levels. The Brennan Center finds secret spending at the local level increased in recent years, in part because of so-called gray money from organizations funneling money through other groups in order to conceal where it’s coming from. Examples of local spending on races include "Mining companies secretly targeting a legislator who opposed permits. Food companies battling a ballot measure to add labeling requirements. Payday lenders supporting an attorney general who promised to shield them from regulation." Because of the lower cost of state and local elections, such donations can have an even bigger impact.http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-26/secret-campaign-cash-gushes-into-u-s-state-and-local-electionsSecret campaign cash from groups that aren’t supposed to coordinate with candidates has over recent election cycles poured into state and local races where the impact can be much greater than at the federal level, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.The New York-based nonprofit law and policy institute researched spending by outside groups in six states between 2006 and 2014. Instances in which donors could be clearly identified fell to 29 percent from 76 percent on average after a landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed unlimited and anonymous spending, according to the study released Sunday, billed as the first of its kind.So-called dark money is more likely to be tied to a specific benefit for contributors at the state and local levels than in federal elections, the report said. Donations, for instance, may influence the selection of a regulator or the passage of a ballot measure affecting a company’s bottom line, and they can have a greater impact on the outcomes by dominating total spending in low-cost races.“The problem is not that dark money will flood every state and local election or even most,” the Brennan Center report said. “It’s that dark money is most likely to turn up where the stakes are particularly valuable, in amounts that could make all the difference in persuading voters.”Cash FountainThe Citizens United decision allowed as free speech unlimited spending by corporations, labor unions, and the wealthy, often through super political action committees that are technically independent from candidates and must reveal their contributors. Yet it also led to increasing contributions to non-profit groups that spend money on campaigns even though their primary purpose isn’t supposed to be politics. And they don’t have to disclose their donors.Hundreds of millions of dollars in dark money have been spent to influence federal elections, and the same phenomenon is happening at the state and local levels, the researchers said. Dark-money spending rose 34 percent at the federal level between 2006 and 2014 and 38 percent during that time in the states examined, the study found.“There’s just less scrutiny of what’s going on in state and local elections,” said Chisun Lee, a senior counsel at the Brennan Center and one of the report’s authors.In the 2012 race for Utah attorney general, for example, a state legislative committee determined that payday-loan companies worked with Republican John Swallow’s campaign to use generic-sounding PACs such as “Now or Never” and secret nonprofit spending to obscure about $450,000 in donations for election ads seeking protection from new consumer-rights rules, the study said.In Wisconsin, an out-of-state mining company secretly put $700,000 into ads attacking legislators who opposed speeding mine permits, according to the report. The company gave money to one non-profit organization that contributed to a second non-profit that ran the ads, and the company’s role surfaced only through an unrelated court case, the report said.Gray FogWorking with the National Institute on Money in State Politics, a nonpartisan organization in Helena, Montana, that compiles campaign data, Brennan Center researchers identified states where it was possible to track all spending for elections in 2006, 2010, and 2014. Only nine met the criteria for the study, and analysts chose to look at Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Maine, and Massachusetts.Researchers tracked dark money -- donations to non-profits that don’t have to be revealed -- as well as what they dubbed “gray money”: contributions to super-PACs whose sources are difficult or impossible to identify because they are made in the name of other PACs or by non-profits. The amount of gray money in the states examined increased to almost 60 percent in 2014 from 15 percent in 2006, the study found.Secret spending often flows from donors who have a direct economic stake in lower-level elections, making them easier to dominate, the report found. Researchers examined court cases and other investigations in states where the secret donors to dark-money groups were revealed to show the influence of the spending.“There’s good reason not to want folks to know who’s behind the spending,” said Lawrence Norden, deputy director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program.While there’s been little action on the federal level to require more disclosure, efforts at the state level can make a difference, the researchers said. In California, which had the most outside spending of the six states examined, stricter disclosure laws meant a low amount of dark money, the report said.The study makes recommendations, including requiring disclosure by all groups that spend a substantial amount on politics, extending disclosure to organizations that donate to other groups, and naming the people in charge of spending entities with opaque titles, while also making reasonable accommodations for spenders.“There is more realistic hope of change at the state and certainly city level,” said the Brennan Center’s Lee.===http://www.prwatch.org/comment/36613#comment-36613ban bag bills state trumps local "preemption"
The pay-to-play model of government advanced by the <a href="http://www.ALECexposed.org" target="_blank">American Legislative Exchange Council</a>

(ALEC) scored another victory this week. On Tuesday, the Wisconsin

Senate voted along party lines to approve a bill that would prohibit

local communities from issuing their own rules on plastic bags and other

containers.

This is part of an emerging national trend.

Preventing local governments from banning, charging a fee for, or otherwise regulating plastic bags is part of a <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/02/13029/2016-ALEC-local-control" target="_blank">national strategy</a> by corporate interests and groups they fund, like ALEC to override progressive policy gains at the city and county level.

Similar state "<a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2015/03/12782/alec-backed-war-local-democracy" target="blank">preemption</a>," or state intervention, measures <a href="http://grassrootschange.net/preemption-update-the-rising-tide-revisited/" target="blank"> have gone after</a> popular city measures to increase the minimum wage, require paid sick leave, ban fracking, and bar discrimination.

The Wisconsin bill, <a href="http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2015/related/proposals/ab730" target="blank">AB 730/SB 601</a>, was introduced by <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Wisconsin_ALEC_Politicians" target="blank">ALEC legislators</a>

including Reps. Rob Swearingen, David Craig, Mike Kuglitsch, David

Murphy. ALEC legislator co-sponsors include Sens. Frank Lasee, Chris

Kapenga, and Devin LeMahieu. (Through ALEC, corporate lobbyists get an

equal vote with state legislators on ALEC task forces considering

“model” bills that are priorities to the corporate legislative agendas

of the special interests that fund ALEC or underwrite trips by ALEC

legislators to resort meetings where they are wined and dined.)

In Wisconsin, no city had adopted a plastic bag ban to address the

proliferation of the bags used to carry groceries or other goods, even

though some such bags can take hundreds of years to degrade if left in

the sun (and may never degrade if put in a landfill).
<a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/02/13029/2016-ALEC-local-control">http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/02/13029/2016-ALEC-local-control</a>--by Brendan Fischer, Kim Haddow, and Mary Bottari--

Across America, corporate interests are taking aim at local government.

With Congress gridlocked and a majority of state legislatures

controlled by right-wing interests, cities have become laboratories of

democracy for progressive policies like a higher minimum wage, LGBTQ

protections, or parental leave.

In response, corporate interests and groups like the <a href="http://alecexposed.org" target="_blank">American Legislative Exchange Council</a>

(ALEC) have increasingly been turning to state "preemption"

measures—some of them unprecedentedly aggressive--to override an array

of progressive policy gains at the city or county level.

"2015 saw more efforts to undermine local control on more issues than

any year in history," said Mark Pertschuk, director of the watchdog

group Preemption Watch.

Last year, state legislatures in at least 29 states introduced bills

to block local control over a range of issues, from the minimum wage, to

LGBTQ rights, to immigration, <a href="http://grassrootschange.net/preemption-update-the-rising-tide-revisited/" target="_blank">according to Preemption Watch</a>. Seventeen states considered more than one preemption bill.

And just a few weeks into 2016 state legislative sessions, it's clear

that ending local authority will continue to be the go-to strategy for

state legislators and their special interest allies, as a means of

blocking earned sick days, minimum wage hikes, tobacco and fracking

bans, pro-worker policies, or anti-discrimination laws.

Bills to stop local fracking bans have been already filed this year

in Colorado, New Mexico and and Florida. Minimum wage preemption bills

have been filed in Washington and Illinois. Legislation has been filed

in Indiana, Michigan and New Mexico to stop local action on fair

scheduling ordinances. Advocates are tracking preemption bills targeting

LGBTQ ordinances in South Carolina, Virginia, Oklahoma and Indiana, and

expect to see bills in North Carolina, Mississippi and West Virginia.

Unions are bracing for bills in a spate of states aimed at limiting

municipal labor standard-setting.

In Florida alone, lawmakers have already filed more than 20 bills

seeking to preempt local authority on issues including oil and gas

regulations, construction standards for abortion clinics and whether a

town can declare itself a sanctuary city.

And in Oklahoma, legislators just introduced a <a href="http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20INT/SB/SB1289%20INT.PDF" target="_blank">wide-ranging bill </a>to

effectively undo home rule and local control. Under the proposal, local

governments would be prohibited from doing almost anything that isn't

specifically authorized by the state legislature.

<h2>Troubling preemption trends emerged in 2015</h2>

Over time, bills interfering in local democracy have become wider in

scope and more hostile to home rule. More industries and special

interest groups now consider preemption a legislative imperative, using

it not just to stop the advancement of policies they disagree with, but

also to undo elections and repeal laws already on the books.

These efforts to consolidate power at the state level and stop local

progress are part of a long-term corporate-driven strategy. The

Koch-funded ALEC and its local offshoot, the American City County

Exchange (ACCE), have been central to this anti-local democracy effort.

ALEC has long pushed bills like the <a href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/b/ba/1E6-Living_Wage_Mandate_Preemption_Act_Exposed.pdf" target="blank">"Living Wage Mandate Preemption Act"</a> to block local governments from raising the wage. It has worked to <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/03/12010/community-owned-internet-long-targeted-alec-and-big-telecom-under-fire-georgia" target="blank">preempt community-run municipal broadband</a> in 19 states – which benefits ALEC funders like AT&T and Comcast -- and <a href="http://www.progressive.org/news/2014/05/187699/oregons-gmo-sellout" target="_blank">local anti-GMO policies</a>, which benefits ALEC funders like CropLife America.

A new trend that emerged in 2015 was the introduction of wide-ranging

bills prohibiting local control over a broad set of issues, such as

Michigan's <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/05/13/3658201/michigan-death-star-employment-bill/" target="_blank">"Death Star"</a>

preemption bill (HB 4052) which bars local governments from regulating

everything from paid sick days and minimum wage to scheduling for retail

stores and ban the box ordinances. Originally, the bill included

language that could have eliminated local protections against LGBTQ

discrimination. That section was not contained in the final law, but it

did pass in Arkansas. North Carolina also considered a "Death Star"

preemption bill last year, but too late in the session to move it.

2015 also saw narrowly-focused bills evolve into comprehensive

attacks on local control. These so-called "Christmas Tree" bills start

out as say, a ban on local plastic bag regulations, and are then hung

with an array of other provisions crafted to override local lawmaking.

For example, a law in Missouri enacted last year that blocked local

government authority to enact paid sick days or raise the minimum wage

started as a plastic bag ban.

Last year also saw the rise of "super-preemption" bills that not only

block local governments from enacting regulations, but give

corporations and individuals the right to sue cities or counties if they

don't comply.

Here is a snapshot of some corporate-backed efforts to override local control in 2015:

<h2>Paid Sick Days and Minimum Wage</h2>

Bills prohibiting local government from enacting paid sick day

guarantees were enacted in Michigan, Oregon, and Missouri in 2015.

Republican-controlled legislatures in Montana and Virginia also passed

paid sick days preemption, but the state's governors ultimately vetoed

the measures. Missouri Governor Jay Nixon's veto, however, was

overridden by the Republican-controlled legislature.

The spread of these bills <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/04/12037/efforts-deliver-kill-shot-paid-sick-leave-tied-alec" target="_blank">can be tied to ALEC</a>

and its funder the National Restaurant Association (NRA), which

represents big chain restaurants. At ALEC's August 2011 meeting in New

Orleans, an NRA executive shared a paid sick day preemption bill that

had recently been signed into law by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, as

well as an NRA target list and map of state and local paid sick leave

policies. In the years following that meeting, similar paid sick day

preemption legislation was enacted in sixteen states, in most cases

introduced by ALEC members, and with backing from the state NRA

affiliates.

Last year—in addition to the five states that passed paid sick day

preemption bills—legislation was also introduced in Alabama, Minnesota,

New Jersey, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina.

<h2>Regulation of Fracking</h2>

In recent years, dozens of cities in states like Ohio and

Pennsylvania have banned hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, citing

public health concerns about water contamination and earthquakes.

Yet after residents of Denton, Texas voted for an anti-fracking

ballot initiative in November 2014, the oil and gas industry began to

fight back. The industry quickly sued, and ALEC legislators in the state

capitol responded with a deluge of bills to override local authority

over public health—<a href="http://www.star-telegram.com/news/business/article40470966.html" target="_blank">even though most Texans</a> support local control over fracking.

ALEC has <a href="http://www.marketplace.org/2015/05/04/sustainability/ban-fracking-bans-no-you-didnt-misread" target="_blank">acknowledged</a>

its role in promoting fracking preemption, and at the December meeting,

of ALEC's local government-focused spinoff, ACCE, members were warned

of the "epidemic" of "draconian" local restrictions against fracking, <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2015/12/12998/alec-and-acce-pay-play-meeting-belly-beast-scottsdale" target="_blank">according to a report from the meeting</a>.

Jacki Pick of the Koch-backed National Center for Policy Analysis (and a

talk show host on Glenn Beck's "The Blaze" network) warned that "the

oil and gas industry will be destroyed unless conservatives act."

Both Texas and Oklahoma adopted laws preempting local governments

from regulating the oil and gas industry in 2015. Bills were also

introduced in <a href="http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=55040" target="_blank">Florida</a>

and New Mexico. In Wisconsin, where the fine silica sand used in

fracking is mined, the Republican-controlled state legislature also

considered bills to override local frac sand mining regulation.

<h2>LGBTQ Rights</h2>

The religious right has also begun using a preemption strategy to override local protections for LGBTQ rights.

"The push for LGBT nondiscrimination protections--laws that would

cover both sexual orientation and gender identity in the areas of

employment, housing and public accommodations--have stalled at the

statewide level," said Andy Garcia, Program Manager at the Equality

Federation. "As a result, efforts have shifted to the city and county

level in the form of municipal nondiscrimination ordinances."...
=-http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/07/people-win-over-shell/
steingraber NY[http://www.alternet.org/food/new-gmo-free-zone-will-protect-traditional-farmers-colorado New GMO-Free Zone Will Protect Traditional Farmers in Colorado]:The zone will help traditional and organic farmers avoid the risk of transgenic contamination from nearby GE crops, particularly GE corn. 11/15.http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/04/fracking-bill-of-rights/penn frack
Grant joins growing numbers of communities across Pennsylvania and the U.S. that are coming together in a community rights movement to stand up to a system of law that forces <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/fracking-2/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">fracking</a>waste wells and other practices into communities, and protects corporations over people, communities and nature. The passage of the Grant charter comes fourteen months after the township was sued by Pennsylvania General Energy Company (PGE) and the Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Association (PIOGA). PGE proposed a fracking wastewater injection well for the community against the wishes of township residents. Injection wells have <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=fracking+drinking+water" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">polluted drinking water</a> and triggered <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=earthquakes" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">earthquakes</a> in several states.In June 2014, the elected officials of Grant Township adopted a Community Bill of Rights Ordinance, which prohibited the injection well as a violation of the community’s rights to clean air and water and local self-government.In its lawsuit, <a href="http://celdf.org/2015/08/grant-township-pa-refusing-to-be-poisoned-and-demanding-democracy/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">PGE claimed</a> that it had a right to inject wastewater into the township. PIOGA has also declared that there is “no constitutional right to local self-government” or to be free from the harms associated with oil and gas production. Although a recent ruling in mid-October invalidated a portion of the ordinance, the people of Grant Township have now reinstated the ban that the judge overturned. Transformation of the community into a home rule township now invalidates most of that court ruling.Stacy Wanchisn Long, local resident and member of the commission that drafted the charter, stated, “Today’s vote reaffirms what our residents have been saying for the past year: we are standing up to protect our rights, and we reject the proposed injection well. All of this is possible because of the support and involvement from so many Grant Township residents over the past year who have been unwavering in their commitment to ensure the people of Grant have more of a say over what happens in our community.”Chad Nicholson of the <a href="http://celdf.org/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund</a> (CELDF), served as a consultant to the commission that drafted the charter. CELDF has assisted close to 200 communities across the U.S. in advancing community rights. “Tonight, the people of Grant Township spoke loud and clear: They have rights, and they will protect those rights. We at CELDF congratulate the people of the Township on becoming the first municipality in the nation to draft and adopt a local, rights-based constitution,” Nicholson said.TOWNSHIPS FIGHT BACK IN 2001 SEVERAL TOWNSHIPS IN PENNSYLVANIA PASSED ORDINANCES FORBIDDING CORPORATIONS FROM OWNING OR CONTROLLING FARMS IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. “THEY CHOSE TO GO THAT ROUTE INSTEAD OF THE REGULATORY ROUTE,” SAID ATTORNEY THOMAS LINZEY OF THE COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND (CELDF). “IF WE JUST GOT A REGULATION PASSED ABOUT, FOR EXAMPLE, ODOR FROM FACTORY FARMS, THEN THE ENTIRE DEBATE FROM THEN ON WOULD BE ABOUT ODOR. BUT WHAT WE WANT TO CHALLENGE IS THE RIGHT FOR THESE HUGE CORPORATE FARMING OPERATIONS TO EXIST IN OUR COMMUNITIES IN THE FIRST PLACE.”<a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[3]" style="line-height: 22px; text-transform: uppercase; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[3]</a> IN DECEMBER 2001, GENE MELLOTT, THE SECRETARY FOR THOMPSON TOWNSHIP,PENNSYLVANIA, TOLD ME THAT HIS TOWNSHIP HAD ADOPTED SEVERAL SUCH ORDINANCES, INCLUDING “AN ORDINANCE FORBIDDING CONFINED ANIMAL-FEEDING OPERATIONS FROM BEING OWNED AND OPERATED BY A CORPORATION” AND “ONE THAT DEALS WITH CORPORATIONS WHO HAVE A PREVIOUS HISTORY OF VIOLATIONS, DENYING THEM ACCESS TO STARTING UP AN ANIMAL-FEEDING OPERATION.”ecowatchHowever many of these important measures are in trouble in the U.S. California’s landmark legislation is now <a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-california-plastic-bag-ban-20150223-story.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">officially on hold</a>, with a referendum to repeal the ban added to the ballot for November 2016. Florida and Arizona have both already passed bills making the banning ofplastic bags illegal. Powerful and large special interest lobbying groups are behind these “ban bans” as well as litigation aimed at already existing bans. Outside interests are funding these efforts to dissuade and dismantle local level legislation. Primary among them is the ProgressiveBag Affiliates, funded by the largest plastic bag manufacturers in the country and the American Chemistry Council.On March 26, the Georgia House <a href="http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/georgia-house-narrowly-votes-down-bill-to-bar-loca/nkghL/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">defeated Senate Bill 139</a>, legislation prohibiting cities and towns from restricting plastic bags and other single-use items. Right up to the vote, this was a heated issue with both sides trying to garner support. I testified in opposition to the bill because I am passionate about instilling the values of reusing and recycling, as well as supporting legislation that makes good common sense. This bill did not.7/15big Texas Oil and Gas Torpedo a Small City's Effort to Ban Fracking — Bye Bye Local DemocracyThe people spoke and were promptly ignored.By Reynard Loki / AlterNet July 1, 2015
Following litigation from corporate interests including the Texas Oil and Gas Association (TXOGA) and the Texas General Land Office (GLO), as well as pressure from the Texas legislature, the Denton City Council has repealed a first-of-its-kind voter approved ban on fracking that had been passed through a ballot measure during the November 2014 general election. Drilling operations have resumed, while residents have vowed to uphold the ban.


Just hours after the fracking ban was passed, TXOGA, the oldest and largest trade organization in Texas representing petroleum interests, whose approximately 4,000 members produce in excess of 92 percent of the state's crude oil and natural gas, and the GLO, the state agency responsible for managing lands and mineral rights owned by the state, filed two separate lawsuits against Denton, saying that the ban was arbitrary and unconstitutional.
In voluntarily giving up its local control, the Denton City Council cited HB 40, a GOP-drafted state bill that was signed into law on May 18 by Governor Greg Abbot, conceding that the local fracking ban was unenforceable under a new state law.
RELATED: 8 Dangerous Side Effects of Fracking That the Industry Doesn't Want You to Hear About
The council said repealing the ban was “in the overall interest of the Denton taxpayers to strategically repeal the ordinance,” in a statement. “Doing so not only potentially reduces ongoing court costs and attorneys fees related to ongoing litigation” but it also “significantly mitigates problems and perceptions associated with operational discrepancies between the ban ordinance and newly-adopted state law.”

Anti-fracking activists protesting in Denton, Texas, on May 31, 2015 (image: Don't Frack with Denton/Facebook)
Nullifying local efforts to ban fracking across the state, the law was backed by ALEC (The American Legislative Exchange Council), a nonprofit organization of conservative state legislators and private sector representatives that uses corporate contributions to draft and sell prepackaged conservative bills to state legislatures across the nation. ALEC has backed restrictive voter ID laws and drafted Florida's "Stand Your Ground" statute.
RELATED: Fracking Has Now Been Linked to Low Birth Weight Babies
"The whole ALEC team, led by Phil King [Republican Texas state representative who is serving as ALEC's national chair], is more considerate of the property rights of corporations than they are the property rights of homeowners and individuals," said former Fort Worth Rep. Lon Burnam, who now works for Public Citizen. "And this is what this battle is really about, because in Texas, the overriding law is deferential treatment to the subsurface mineral right owners over the surface homeowners."

Violet Palmer, a 92-year-old partially-sighted anti-fracking activist was arrested by police at a Denton protest (image: Frack Free Denton/Facebook)
"This law ensures that Texas avoids a patchwork quilt of regulations that differ from region to region, differ from county to county or city to city," said Abbott. "HB 40 strikes a meaningful and correct balance between local control and preserving the state's authority to ensure that regulations are even-handed and do not hamper job creation."
RELATED: Earthquakes Tied to Fracking Boom, Two New Studies Confirm
“The same corporate interests that are behind this push to halt fracking bans and prevent any meaningful action to protect our planet are the same ones pushing to restrict access to the ballot," said Wenonah Hauter, president of Food & Water Watch, a consumer advocacy nonprofit, in a press release. "Their agenda is unpopular and they can only continue to push their regressive policies by preventing popular democracy from flourishing."
Adam Briggle of the anti-fracking group Denton Drilling Awareness said, "This is definitely not the end of the line. It is the beginning of a new chapter in our fight, and it’s one that’s going to be Texas-wide now."
On the same day that the Denton City Council voted to repeal the ban, there was a protest at a Denton fracking site at which several people were arrested, including Violet Palmer, a partially blind 92-year-old activist who has never even had a parking ticket. "Really, there is so little I can do, but I can do it by protesting," Palmer said.
RELATED: Did the Government Illegally Open up 400,000 Acres in California for Fracking?

texas frack

<div id="pf-src" style="height: auto; width: 779px; border-bottom: 2px dashed rgb(221, 221, 221); padding-bottom: 6px; line-height: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 1; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="pf-src-name" href="http://ecowatch.com/" style="margin-left: 6px; margin-right: 12px; font-weight: bold; display: block; float: left; cursor: default; word-wrap: break-word; text-decoration: none;">ecowatch.com</a><a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/19/texas-prohibits-local-fracking-bans/?utm_source=EcoWatch+List&utm_campaign=4f7022ec41-Top_News_5_19_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_49c7d43dc9-4f7022ec41-85920373" class="pf-src-url" style="word-wrap: break-word; display: block; float: right; text-decoration: none; cursor: default;">http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/19/texas-prohibits-local-fracking-bans/?utm_source=EcoWatch+List&utm_campaign=4f7022ec41-Top_News_5_19_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_49c7d43dc9-4f7022ec41-85920373</a>

</div>

<h1 id="pf-title" style="margin: 1em 0px; clear: both; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 1; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; direction: ltr; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); break-inside: avoid !important;">It’s Official: Texas Prohibits Local Fracking Bans</h1>

<span id="pf_author" style="display: block; margin: -1em 0px 1em; float: left; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 1; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Earthworks, Denton Drilling Awareness Group, Earthjustice and Natural Resources Defense Council

Yesterday Texas Gov. Abbott <a href="ftp://ftp.legis.state.tx.us/bills/84R/billtext/html/house_bills/HB00001_HB00099/HB00040I.htm" target="_blank" style="word-wrap: break-word; text-decoration: none;">signed HB 40</a> into law. Written by former ExxonMobil lawyer Shannon Ratliff, the statute forces every Texas municipality wanting common sense limits on oil and gas development to demonstrate its rules are “commercially reasonable.” It effectively <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/05/texas-ban-on-fracking-bans/" style="word-wrap: break-word; text-decoration: none;">overturns a Denton ballot initiative banning fracking</a> that passed last November.

“HB 40 was written by the oil and gas industry, for the oil and gas industry, to prevent voters from holding the oil and gas industry accountable for its impacts,” said Earthworks’ Texas organizer Sharon Wilson. Wilson, who played a key role in the Denton ballot initiative, continued, “It was the oil and gas industry’s contempt for impacted residents that pushed <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=denton" style="word-wrap: break-word; text-decoration: none;">Denton</a>voters to <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/05/fracking-ban-passes/" style="word-wrap: break-word; text-decoration: none;">ban fracking in the first place</a>. And now the oil and gas industry, through state lawmakers, has doubled down by showing every city in Texas that same contempt.”

By a 59-41 percent vote, including 70 percent of straight ticket Republican voters, the residents of Denton banned <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/fracking-2/" style="word-wrap: break-word; text-decoration: none;">hydraulic fracturing</a> within city limits. The ban was a last resort after more than five years of fruitlessly petitioning oil and gas companies, the city and the state for help. “By signing HB40 into law, Governor Abbott just declared that industry profits are more important than our health, our homes and our kids,” said Adam Briggle, president of the Denton Drilling Awareness Group and a leader in the Frack Free Denton effort. He continued, “The letter of Texas law now says no city can ‘effectively prevent an oil and gas operation from occurring,’ no matter the threat to families’ health and safety or damage to private property.”

The City of Denton is fighting a lawsuit brought against it by the oil and gas industry over its ordinance. Until HB40, attorneys for the city felt fairly confident their ordinance would stand. The Denton Drilling Awareness Group and Earthworks have intervened in the case in support of the city. They are represented by Earthjustice, attorneys from the Natural Resources Defense Counsel and the Texas law firm Brown & Hofmeister, LLP.

“The Texas courts have upheld a long tradition of local control, so the Governor and the Legislature took matters into their own hands.  Now, they have capitulated to the greedy but powerful oil and gas industry at the expense of their own constituents’ health, well-being, and property rights,” said Earthjustice attorney Deborah Goldberg, who is co-counsel for the citizen groups and successfully defended the town of Dryden, New York, in a similar court case. “We have been proud to represent the proponents of Denton’s ban, and we know they will regroup and fight back against this legislative over-reach.”

“The people of Denton exercised their democratic right to keep a nasty industrial process out of their community–and now big oil and their friends in high places are steamrolling them, along with everyone else in Texas,” said NRDC attorney Dan Raichel, co-counsel for the citizen’s groups. “The interests of a powerful industry should never take priority over the health and safety of American families. Texans should be able to keep dangerous activities and chemicals away from their homes, schools, and hospitals—just as hundreds of other communities across the country have already done.”

</div>

---

Citizens of Denton, Texas <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/12/05/denton-texas-fracking-ban-lawsuit/" style="text-decoration: none;">are still fighting to keep fracking banned</a> within city limits despite the vote last November in favor of the ban. Ever since <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/05/fracking-ban-passes/" style="text-decoration: none;">the vote</a>, state lawmakers <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/12/carl-pope-denton-fracking-ban/" style="text-decoration: none;">in cahoots with the oil and gas industry</a> and the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, <a href="http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/29485-since-the-city-of-denton-banned-fracking-texas-gop-moves-to-pre-empt-local-control" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">have attempted to strip municipalities</a>like Denton of <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/17/home-rule-fracking-pipelines/" style="text-decoration: none;">home rule authority</a> to override the city’s ban, according to <a href="http://frackfreedenton.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Frack Free Denton</a>.

The town is the first municipality in Texas to ban fracking and has consequently become ground zero for the fracking debate. Yesterday, Denton Mayor Chris Watts and City Attorney Anita Burgess traveled to Austin to <a href="http://www.dentonrc.com/local-news/local-news-headlines/20150323-testimony-on-hb-40-varies-widely.ece" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">testify</a>at a hearing on two bills that have emerged in response to Denton’s fracking ban, according to Frack Free Denton. In solidarity with grassroots organizers from the Frack Free Denton movement and other residents from small Texas towns who also testified in Austin, documentary filmmaker and Denton resident Garrett Graham released a <a href="https://vimeo.com/122943445" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">new trailer</a> for his forthcoming film.

===

http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/17/home-rule-fracking-pipelines/

Across the country, battles are raging as communities attempt to protect the air, soil and water within their borders and the safety of their residents. These battles are taking the form of debates about whether state regulations can or should erase local home rule.

Colorado and Texas are engaged in such high-profile battles after voters in communities like<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/05/fracking-ban-passes/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Denton, Texas</a> and <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/14/boulder-county-fracking-ban/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Boulder</a>, Longmont and <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/08/judge-overturns-fort-collins-five-year-fracking-ban/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Fort Collins</a>, Colorado, passed <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/fracking-2/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">fracking bans</a>. That has opened up ongoing maneuvers and lawsuits as <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/07/denton-fracking-ban-bush-attack/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">state governments work with oil and gas companies</a> to uphold the exploration and extraction interests of the latter despite citizen concerns about environmental pollution, noise, traffic and infrastructure stress.

ut with communities and citizens becoming more and more determined to have their say, fossil fuel interests put out one blaze only to find a dozen more flaring up. Many of those communities are using a strategy developed by the Pennsylvania-based <a href="http://celdf.org/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund</a> (CELDF) to address environmental issues: a community bill of rights. Now oil and gas companies are working to suppress those bills of rights.

They were successful in Ohio last week where a judge in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) struck down the community bill of rights passed by suburban Broadview Heights voters by a 2-1 margin n November 2012 to keep additional drilling operations out of their community. The decision is considered significant because it’s the first community bill of rights in Ohio to get a legal review. Judge Michael Astrab found it in conflict with state law. Many other Ohio cities have passed or attempted to pass such bills of rights, including Youngstown and Kent where they were defeated and Columbus, where activists are working to put a city charter amendment on the ballot. Oberlin and Athens have passed them.

<a href="http://www.ohio.com/blogs/drilling/ohio-utica-shale-1.291290/judge-strikes-down-broadview-heights-community-bill-of-rights-1.574466" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">According to the Akron Beacon-Journal</a>, “Astrab said the city’s community bill of rights conflicts with state law that gives the Ohio Department of Natural Resources sole authority to regulate drillers since 2004.”

Broadview Heights resident Tish O’Dell of <a href="http://www.mothersagainstfracking.org/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Mothers Against Drilling in Our Neighborhoods</a>(MADION), <a href="http://www.ohio.com/blogs/drilling/ohio-utica-shale-1.291290/group-reacts-to-ruling-in-broadview-community-rights-case-1.575269" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">said</a>, “We now see that at least one Court is not prepared to uphold our right to protect our health and safety. Instead, the court prohibited our city from protecting us. If no branch of our government is going to protect us from these corporate harms, then our government has ceased to be legitimate.”

Out in Oregon, citizens are fighting the same battle in a different way: they want to put it in their constitution so a judge can’t overturn it. The <a href="http://orcrn.org/state/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Oregon Community Rights Network</a> (OCRN) is <a href="http://www.eugeneweekly.com/20150312/news-briefs/amendment-would-put-local-rights-local-hands" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">working to collect signatures to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot</a> in November 2016 that would protect the right of communities to make decisions about what goes on inside their borders and the legality of those decisions even if they conflict with corporate interests.

“It is clear that the current legal structure allows corporations to treat our communities as property,” <a href="http://orcrn.org/state/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">said Eron King</a>, board president of OCRN. “We—the people –have become mere tenants of the corporations. It’s time we change that by changing our constitution to reflect that our right to local, community self-government is above corporate control.”

Among the issues OCRN cites as areas where corporations’ rights can erase those of the community are growing GMOs, transporting oil and gas, spraying pesticides and building natural gas pipelines.

On the other side of the country in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, <a href="http://lancasteragainstpipelines.nationbuilder.com/homeruleupdate" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">pipelines are the issue</a> as citizens in Martic Township mobilize under the banner of Martic SOUL (Save Our Unspoiled Land) to prevent a natural gas pipeline from passing through their community.

“In October 2014, Martic Township Supervisors announced their opposition against the construction of the proposed Atlantic Sunrise Project,” the group <a href="http://lancasteragainstpipelines.nationbuilder.com/homeruleupdate" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Lancaster Against Pipelines posted on its website</a>. “Following this announcement, residents in Martic as well as Conestoga Townships, requested that the supervisors pass an ordinance for a Community Bill of Rights. This Community Bill of Rights proposed the ban of construction of natural gas pipelines within the respective townships and the rights to local governance, sustainable energy, clean air, clean water among other things. The proposed ordinance was shot down, in both townships.”

The group is running seven anti-pipeline candidates in a May election for members of the local Government Study Commission and has turned to CELDF to help it with a Community Bill of Rights to protect home rule.

In an <a href="http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/columnists/home-rule-is-the-answer-in-martic-township/article_05a21176-bee5-11e4-96fd-6f5f652836a7.html" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">editorial posted at Lancaster Online</a>, Martic resident and activist Emily Weinstock-Collins announced the launch of Home Rule in Martic Township and support for these candidates, writing, “We are dedicated to protecting our residents and securing the future of Martic Township; home rule is our next step toward achieving these goals. True democracy gives power to the people, not to the highest bidder.  Home rule is a step towards that democracy.”

A pipeline is also outraging citizens in southern New Hampshire, where communities are <a href="http://www.sentinelsource.com/news/local/voters-pass-anti-pipeline-articles-in-fitzwilliam-rindge-winchester/article_171fd95b-d263-5043-85d1-23fcd27be96e.html" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">mobilizing against a large-scale natural gas pipeline</a>, the Northeast Energy Direct (NED), that would cut through their towns. Three of the five towns impacted have already voted to take action against pipeline company Kinder-Morgan with the other two set to vote this week, following extensive community protests.

“For too long, decisions related to energy have been controlled by corporations and individuals motivated by financial and political interests rather than by the public good,” <a href="http://nhpipelineawareness.org/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">New Hampshire Pipeline Awareness.org</a> posted. “This project is more of the same. The prospective benefit to the fossil fuel industry is clear, but the alleged public need has not been demonstrated.”

“One thing I love about New Hampshire is that we are politically devoted to local control,” said Medicine Story, a Wampanoag Indian and longtime resident of Greenville, one of the impacted communities, <a href="http://www.ledgertranscript.com/home/15805485-95/residents-keep-up-pipeline-fight" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">told the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript</a>. “If this pipeline was something that most people in the area wanted, then that’s what everyone would work toward. Clearly, that isn’t the case here.”

==

<h1 class="pageTitle" itemprop="name" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px 20px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; line-height: 28px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Should McDonald’s & Monsanto Have the Same Rights as People? A Debate on Corporate Personhood</h1>

</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its Citizens United v. FEC decision striking down the prohibition on corporate expenditures in federal elections. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are people, with the same right to influence politics as voters. Meanwhile, many corporations including McDonald’s, Monsanto and Peabody Energy have cited the principle of corporate constitutional rights in recent efforts to fight back against new laws. McDonald’s and other franchises are suing the city of Seattle over its new $15-an-hour minimum wage law, arguing it violates its corporate personhood rights. They are basing their case on the 14th Amendment, a constitutional provision written to protect newly freed slaves after the Civil War and ensure equal rights for all people. Monsanto is challenging Vermont’s recently passed GMO-labeling law under the First Amendment, claiming that it forces them to "speak" against their will. We host a debate on the movement to draft a constitutional amendment to overturn the doctrine of corporate constitutional rights with two guests: Ron Fein, legal director at Free Speech for People, and Kent Greenfield,professor of law and Dean’s Research Scholar at Boston College Law School.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">http://www.democracynow.org/2015/3/13/should_mcdonalds_monsanto_have_the_same</div>

==

PEABODY MISSOURI

yikes, CU meets local ordinances:

Early in April, coal industry executive Shaun McCutcheon won big when the Supreme Court swept away limits on how much money wealthy donors can contribute to federal political campaigns. But in St. Louis, Mo., coal interests are trying to prevent people from even voting.

This story began when ordinary citizens joined together and took a stand against both climate change and their city’s destructive practice of granting enormous tax breaks to big business while cutting funding for public services. They talked to thousands of residents who were upset that St. Louis keeps giving away tens of millions of dollars of badly needed public money to Peabody Energy (the world’s largest private-sector coal company) and the lobbyists, banks, and law firms that enable it. And after hearing over and over again that “there oughta be a law” against corporate welfare for polluters, they did what we learned in civics class: they wrote a law that would ban public financial incentives to unsustainable energy producers and their major business partners

They didn’t just write the law: Under the banner of Take Back St. Louis, they walked door-to-door, talking to friends, neighbors, and strangers about their idea. They collected over 22,000 signatures — more than 10 percent of all the voters in St. Louis — on a petition for a ballot initiative. The city’s elections board verified the signatures, and began preparing to print ballots

This is where you might expect to hear about a vigorous election campaign, with arguments from both sides put to the voters, a spirited debate about the future of St. Louis and our planet, and finally, the voters making their choice at the ballot box. You might even expect to hear about the coal company spending millions of dollars to fight the initiative in the days before the vote

But you’d be wrong: There was no vote. Instead, the coal company’s lawyers rushed to court and asked a judge to block the election on the grounds that the law would unfairly discriminate against the coal company and its business partners, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. The judge agreed, and cited the Supreme Court’s infamous Citizens United decision for the theory that business entities “are entitled to constitutional protection as citizens.” He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the vote, and scheduled a trial for March 31

At the trial, Take Back St. Louis provided evidence about the environmental damage caused by burning coal, and the damage to the fabric of St. Louis caused by the city’s penchant for giving away public dollars to big business. The other side didn’t put any witnesses on the stand. The judge may make his final decision any day now.

Not everyone will agree that this ballot initiative is the best policy, and that’s fine. The Take Back St. Louis folks think they can convince a majority of St. Louis voters, and they’re willing to take on the coal interests in a contest for votes. But first, the court has to get out of the way. Now that the judge has the evidence, he has a chance to get this right, lift his injunction, and let the vote proceed.

Whether or not you think that giving tax breaks to coal companies and their business partners is a good idea, we should all agree that this is a question for voters, not judges. Because it was bad enough when coal companies could simply open their checkbooks to flood elections with unlimited spending; now they won’t even let people vote.

Ron Fein is the Legal Director for Free Speech For People, an organization dedicated to challenging the misuse of corporate power and restoring republican democracy to the people.

http://grist.org/business-technology/do-coal-companies-have-more-rights-than-voters

http://www.takebackstlouis.com/the_initiative

--

may 30

On Tuesday, a St. Louis judge threw out a ballot initiative that would amend the city charter to prohibit tax breaks for fossil fuel companies and their major business partners. Before residents even had a chance to vote.

The story began when citizens took a stand against both climate change and St. Louis’ destructive practice of granting tax breaks to big business while cutting funding for public services. They wrote a law and collected enough signatures to put it on the ballot for a public vote.

But nobody can vote.

Coal allies, fearful that the initiative would pass, pursued a two-pronged strategy to prevent it from ever reaching the ballot. And the success (so far) of that strategy shows why the democratic system is rigged in favor of big corporations and special interests.

First, the court challenge. This week, the judge issued a final order preventing St. Louis residents from voting on the initiative. The judge theorized that state law doesn’t allow cities to make rules about who gets tax breaks, and that the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause prevents voters from saying that they don’t want to give tax breaks to coal companies and their business partners. On the latter point, the judge opined that, under the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, “business organizations are ‘persons’ entitled to equal protection as well as other constitutional rights.”

Second, the legislative challenge. While the case was pending, the mayor’s office pushed a curious amendment to an obscure state bill. In the middle of a bill about county prosecutors and sewer districts, you’ll find a provision that specifically prohibits the city of St. Louis from passing, by ballot measure, any restrictions on tax breaks for coal mining companies. There’s only one coal mining company in St. Louis known to receive city tax breaks: Peabody Energy.

So in court, the claim is that coal companies’ constitutional rights are violated by a citizen initiative to stem the flow of special tax breaks. And in the Legislature — where Peabody donors spent almost half a million dollars in the last two elections — the legislators slip in a special provision preventing St. Louis voters from taking a vote on whether to give tax breaks to Peabody.

Is democracy in St. Louis only for those who can pay? The office of the mayor — whom Peabody funds — has helped to both challenge the initiative in court and lobby the Legislature to prevent St. Louisans from voting on city policy.

We’re at a turning point. The Supreme Court keeps striking down common-sense rules to limit the influence of wealthy donors and corporate interests in our political system. Next week, the U.S. Senate is holding a hearing on a constitutional amendment to restore our ability to limit the influence of money in politics, and the full Senate will vote on it this year.

Ultimately, this isn’t just about tax breaks for one coal company in one city. It’s about our democracy, and why we must fight to reclaim it.

Ron Fein is the legal director of Free Speech For People, and co-counsel to the Take Back St. Louis campaign, along with a Missouri-based legal team. Stuart Keating is a St. Louis attorney with a practice specializing in environmental and corporate law, and is co-counsel to the Take Back St. Louis campaign.

---

links http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/judge-keeps-take-back-st-louis-initiative-off-ballot/article_2a1a22aa-21d8-5577-890a-a9401aae3c16.html

may 27/14

Opponents of the “Take Back St. Louis” initiative succeeded Tuesday in their effort to block the measure from going before voters in the city.

St. Louis Circuit Judge Robert Dierker issued an order prohibiting the city’s Election Board from putting the measure on a ballot.

Dierker’s ruling is a defeat for Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment, or MORE, which led a petition effort to block tax incentives for any company that engages in “unsustainable” energy production — or does $1 million a year in business with such an entity.

Opponents filed suit Jan. 31 to keep the initiative off the April 8 ballot. The suit described the proposed city charter amendment as “intentionally arbitrary and vague” and “disastrous public policy.” It said many businesses could be blocked from receiving city services, perhaps unknowingly because of vague definitions in the measure.

In his 24-page ruling, Dierker said the proposal would “exclude a variety of enterprises from qualifying for benefits under the statutory regime of economic incentives or, (in MORE’s) parlance, corporate welfare.”

MORE’s main target is Peabody Energy, which received tax breaks from the city when it expanded its headquarters in 2011. The group has said tax breaks would be better directed to help small businesses and revitalize poor parts of St. Louis.

Backers of the initiative said that, although they were disappointed by Dierker’s decision, the setback would be temporary. Supporters said in a statement that they were confident an appellate court would put the measure before voters in August or November.

The Take Back St. Louis initiative was begun to correct what the statement said were Mayor Francis Slay’s “failings in gouging the St. Louis public schools and other public programs in order to subsidize corporations.”

Organizations active in the Take Back St. Louis effort will continue to support those who organize against “unsustainable energy producers” such as Peabody and hold the St. Louis Development Corp. accountable for creating living-wage jobs, initiative backers said.

Dierker’s ruling is in a suit filed by Jane Dueker, a lawyer and former Peabody lobbyist.

He ruled that the “manifest purpose” of MORE’s effort “is not so much to advance the use of approved fuels, as to punish enterprises which deal in the disfavored fuels and to punish the enterprises which deal with the disfavored energy producers for their presumed role in furthering the business of the disfavored producers.”

Tim Bryant covers commercial real estate, development and other business stories for the Post-Dispatch. He blogs at Building Blocks, the Post-Dispatch development blog.

--

6 may mayor/state block: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/political-fix/slay-s-office-turns-to-legislature-to-block-local-ballot/article_ec94707c-78ad-5edc-8895-fc1f8e7b2164.html

=

<div class="byline story"><a href="http://alternet.org/">AlterNet</a> [1] / By <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/david-sirota-2">David Sirota</a> [2]</div>

</div>

<h1 property="dc:title" datatype="" class="node-title">Comcast’s Worst Nightmare: How Tennessee Could Save America’s Internet</h1>

</div>

The business lobby often demands that government get out of the way of private corporations, so that competition can flourish and high-quality services can be efficiently delivered to as many consumers as possible. Yet, in an epic fight over telecommunications policy, the paradigm is now being flipped on its head, with corporate forces demanding the government squelch competition and halt the expansion of those high-quality services. Whether and how federal officials act may ultimately shape the future of America's information economy.

The front line in this fight is Chattanooga, Tennessee, where officials at the city's public electric utility, EPB, realized that smart-grid energy infrastructure could also provide consumers super-fast Internet speeds at competitive prices. A few years ago, those officials decided to act on that revelation. Like a publicly traded corporation, the utility issued bonds to raise resources to invest in the new broadband project. Similarly, just as many private corporations ended up receiving federal stimulus dollars, so did EPB, which put those monies into its new network.

The result is a system that now provides the nation's fastest broadband speeds at prices often cheaper than the private competition. As the Chattanooga Times Free Press noted a few years back, "EPB offers faster Internet speeds for the money, and shows equal pep in both uploading and downloading content, with Comcast and AT&T trailing on quickness." Meanwhile, EPB officials tell the Washington Post that the utility's telecom services have become "a great profit center" -- an assertion confirmed by a Standard & Poor credit upgrade notice pointing out that the utility "is now covering all costs from telephone, video and Internet revenue, as well as providing significant financial benefit to the electric system."

This is great news for local businesses and taxpayers -- but it is terrible news for private telecom companies, who not only fear being outcompeted and outperformed in Chattanooga, but also fear the Chattanooga model being promoted in other cities. In response, those telecom firms have been abandoning the standard argument about the private sector. Indeed, as the Times Free Press reported last week, rather than insisting the private sector has inherent advantages over the public sector, the firms have gone to court insisting "that EPB, as a public entity, would have an edge when competing against private companies, which would be at a disadvantage when facing an entity owned by taxpayers."

To date, those court cases have been thwarted by EPB. However, it is a different story in state legislatures. Once again abandoning the business lobby's typical call for less government intervention, telecom firms have successfully pushed 20 states to pass laws limiting the reach of community-owned utilities like EPB.

That's where Washington comes in. With Census figures showing more than 1 in 5 Tennessee residents having no Internet connection, EPB is now proposing to offer its ultra-fast services to new communities. But it needs the Federal Communications Commission to preempt the Tennessee statute prohibiting the utility from competing with private telecom companies outside its current market.

For EPB, the good news is that FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has repeatedly pledged that in the name of competition and broadband access, he will support preempting state laws like Tennessee's. However, in a capital run by money, EPB may still be politically overpowered. After all, as a community-owned utility in a midsized city, EPB does not have the lobbyists and campaign cash to match those of behemoths like Comcast and AT&T. What the utility does have is a solid track record and a pro-consumer, pro-competition argument.

The question is: Will that be enough to prevent Wheeler from backing down or being blocked by Congress? The future of the Internet may be at stake in the answer.

</div>

</div>

</div>

<div class="tags">See more stories tagged with:

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/telecommunications" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">telecommunications</a> [4],</div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/competition-0" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">competition</a> [5],</div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/corporations" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">corporations</a> [6],</div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/tennessee" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">tennessee</a> [7]</div>

</div>

<div class="print-source_url" style="text-align: left;">Source URL: <a href="http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/comcasts-worst-nightmare-how-tennessee-could-save-americas">http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/comcasts-worst-nightmare-how-tennessee-could-save-americas</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Links:</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[1] http://alternet.org</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/david-sirota-2</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[3] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Comcast’s Worst Nightmare: How Tennessee Could Save America’s Internet</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[4] http://www.alternet.org/tags/telecommunications</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[5] http://www.alternet.org/tags/competition-0</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[6] http://www.alternet.org/tags/corporations</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[7] http://www.alternet.org/tags/tennessee</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B</div>

</div>

==

sludge: Packer Township adopted its ordinance in 2008 to prohibit sludging on farmland, knowing that the law might be challenged. Residents decided that a ban was their only choice. They had seen the impacts of sludging directly, as the ordinance describes:

<div style=" text-align: left;">"In 1994, eleven-year-old Tony Behun from Rush Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania, died from a staphylococcus infection shortly after being exposed to sewage sludge. The following year, seventeen-year-old Daniel Pennock from Reading, Pennsylvania, died from a staphylococcus infection shortly after being exposed to sewage sludge. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognizes staphylococcus as a potential pathogenic component of sewage sludge."</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">The ordinance further states, "The land application of sewage sludge in Packer Township poses a significant threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens and environment of Packer Township."</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">And: "In April 2002, the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which oversees state sewage sludge regulations, issued a report in which it concluded, 'EPA cannot assure the public that current land application [of sewage sludge] practices are protective of human health and the environment.'"</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">A key piece of the Packer ordinance is found in Section 8.12, which eliminates corporate constitutional "rights" and protections within the township. By taking this step, the township is, in effect, stripping away the waste haulers' court-conferred rights, including Fifth and 14th Amendment rights to due process and equal protection, as well as powers under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.</div>

---

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/fracking/two-small-towns-win-huge-legal-case-fracking-will-many-others-follow">http://www.alternet.org/fracking/two-small-towns-win-huge-legal-case-fracking-will-many-others-follow</a>

NY court

==

<h2 style=" text-align: left; border: 0px; margin: 1em 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chemical Conglomerates Retaliate Against Local Democratic Control</h2>

These <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/%22Big_6%22_Pesticide_and_GMO_Corporations" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">"Big 6" pesticide and GMO firms</a> are active on the islands in a big way, making use of the three to four annual growing seasons to develop new GMO seeds more quickly. The development of new GMOs by these pesticide and seed conglomerates goes hand-in-hand with heavy pesticide use in some of the islands' experimental crop fields, new data show.

Kaua'i County -- consisting primarily of the island of Kaua'i, known as Hawai'i's "Garden Isle" and home to Waimea Canyon State Park -- passed a <a href="http://truth-out.org/video/item/20170" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">law</a> in November 2013 that <a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2013/11/20426-kauais-gmo-and-pesticide-bill-is-set-to-become-law-after-veto-override/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">requires disclosure</a> of pesticide use and GMO crops sewn by growers and created buffer zones around schools, parks, medical facilities, and private residences. The law is set to go into effect in August 2014.

Hawai'i County <a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2013/11/hawaii-county-council-passes-gmo-ban-2/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">banned GMOs</a> altogether in November 2013, and a Maui County initiative to ban GMOs recently <a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2014/06/maui-initiative-to-ban-gmo-crops-gets-enough-signatures-for-ballot/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">obtained enough citizen signatures</a> to be placed on the November 2014 ballot.

Since experiencing these setbacks, the big agricultural firms have retaliated in a big way.

Syngenta, DuPont Pioneer, Agrigenetics (doing business as Dow AgroSciences), and BASF have <a href="http://www.staradvertiser.com/s?action=login&f=y&id=245521921" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">sued Kaua'i</a> to block its law.

Monsanto, Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont Pioneer, and several associated trade groups spent over $50,000 lobbying the state legislature from January through April 2014, as legislators considered bills to override the county laws, according to data from the Hawaii State Ethics Commission (as reported through June 6, 2014) analyzed by the Center for Media and Democracy/Progressive Inc. (CMD).

Of these, the Hawai'i Crop Improvement Association (whose <a href="http://www.hciaonline.com/about-hcia/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">members include</a> Dow AgroScience, Monsanto, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Syngenta, and BASF) had the highest expenditures at $10,800; the powerful national trade association the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Chemistry_Council" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">American Chemistry Council</a> (whose <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Chemistry_Council#ACC_Members" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">members include</a> BASF, Bayer, Dow, and DuPont) and Syngenta each spent $10,000; and Monsanto spent $8,982.

Islanders will vote in a <a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2014/06/hawaii-elections-2014-primary-election-ballot/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">primary election</a> for state legislators, governor, and U.S. Congressmembers August 9. Voters will also make initial choices between candidates for mayor and county council seats on Kaua'i and Maui as well as county council seats on Hawai'i.

The big agricultural corporations Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow, DuPont, and Bayer, associated trade groups, and their lobbyists and employees contributed over $700,000 to state and county candidates from November 2006 through December 2013, according to a new CMD analysis of Hawaii Campaign Spending Commission data. Initial campaign finance reports for what is shaping up to be an expensive political battle this year are not yet released.

===

<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/06/30/new-york-towns-ban-fracking/?utm_source=EcoWatch+List&utm_campaign=bec4f1eb21-Top_News_6_28_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_49c7d43dc9-bec4f1eb21-85920373">http://ecowatch.com/2014/06/30/new-york-towns-ban-fracking/?utm_source=EcoWatch+List&utm_campaign=bec4f1eb21-Top_News_6_28_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_49c7d43dc9-bec4f1eb21-85920373</a>

===

These <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/%22Big_6%22_Pesticide_and_GMO_Corporations" target="_blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">"Big 6" pesticide and GMO firms</a> are active on the islands in a big way, making use of the three to four annual growing seasons to develop new GMO seeds more quickly. The development of new GMOs by these pesticide and seed conglomerates goes hand-in-hand with heavy pesticide use in some of the islands' experimental crop fields, new data show.

Kaua'i County -- consisting primarily of the island of Kaua'i, known as Hawai'i's "Garden Isle" and home to Waimea Canyon State Park -- passed a<a href="http://truth-out.org/video/item/20170" target="blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">law</a> in November 2013 that <a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2013/11/20426-kauais-gmo-and-pesticide-bill-is-set-to-become-law-after-veto-override/" target="blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">requires disclosure</a> of pesticide use and GMO crops sewn by growers and created buffer zones around schools, parks, medical facilities, and private residences. The law is set to go into effect in August 2014.

Hawai'i County <a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2013/11/hawaii-county-council-passes-gmo-ban-2/" target="blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">banned GMOs</a> altogether in November 2013, and a Maui County initiative to ban GMOs recently<a href="http://www.civilbeat.com/2014/06/maui-initiative-to-ban-gmo-crops-gets-enough-signatures-for-ballot/" target="blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">obtained enough citizen signatures</a> to be placed on the November 2014 ballot.

Since experiencing these setbacks, the big agricultural firms have retaliated in a big way.

Syngenta, DuPont Pioneer, Agrigenetics (doing business as Dow AgroSciences), and BASF have <a href="http://www.staradvertiser.com/s?action=login&f=y&id=245521921" target="_blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">sued Kaua'i</a> to block its law.

Of these, the Hawai'i Crop Improvement Association (whose <a href="http://www.hciaonline.com/about-hcia/" target="blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">members include</a> Dow AgroScience, Monsanto, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Syngenta, and BASF) had the highest expenditures at $10,800; the powerful national trade association the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Chemistry_Council" target="blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">American Chemistry Council</a> (whose <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Chemistry_Council#ACC_Members" target="_blank" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">members include</a> BASF, Bayer, Dow, and DuPont) and Syngenta each spent $10,000; and Monsanto spent $8,982.

<h2 style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin: 1em 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Big Ag Money Moves to the Ballot...</h2>

==

ORE sellout

http://www.prwatch.org/node/12486

Even though the state of Oregon enacted a law to override the ability of localities to regulate their own food systems, local ballot measures to ban GMO crops passed overwhelmingly in Jackson and Josephine Counties on May 20, according to news reports. "We fought the most powerful and influential chemical companies in the world and we won," Elise Higley, a local farmer with the anti-GMO group Our Family Farms Coalition, told The Oregonian.The Progressive magazine tells the backstory below and reveals that the preemption measure shares language with an ALEC model bill.

<div style=" text-align: left;">When the headline said that Oregon’s Democratic governor, John Kitzhaber, had signed into law a corporate-backed bill overriding local counties’ ability to regulate their own food systems, Lisa Arkin was shocked.</div>

“I can viscerally remember the day I looked at the headline,” she says. “It was such a deep feeling of disgust and disbelief. I couldn’t believe that any amount of money from outside corporations could convince our elected leaders in Oregon to abandon the democratic process in that way.”

===

---yikes, CU meets local ordinances:

Early in April, coal industry executive Shaun McCutcheon won big when the Supreme Court<a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-536_e1pf.pdf" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;"> swept away limits</a> on how much money wealthy donors can contribute to federal political campaigns. But in St. Louis, Mo., coal interests are trying to prevent people from even voting.

This story began when ordinary citizens<a href="http://www.takebackstlouis.com/the_initiative" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;"> joined together</a> and took a stand against both climate change and their city’s destructive practice of granting enormous tax breaks to big business while cutting funding for public services. They talked to thousands of residents who were upset that St. Louis keeps giving away tens of millions of dollars of badly needed public money to <a href="http://www.slpl.lib.mo.us/cco/ords/data/ord8701.htm" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">Peabody Energy</a> (the world’s largest private-sector coal company) and the <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/business/st-louis-opens-checkbook-to-keep-e%E2%80%A6cle_2030e424-4d19-5c00-ae2b-5351bf21dab4.html" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">lobbyists, banks, and law firms</a> that enable it. And after hearing over and over again that “there oughta be a law” against corporate welfare for polluters, they did what we learned in civics class: they wrote a law that would<a href="http://www.takebackstlouis.com/full_text" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;"> ban public financial incentives</a> to unsustainable energy producers and their major business partners.

They didn’t just write the law: Under the banner of <a href="http://www.takebackstlouis.com/" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">Take Back St. Louis</a>, they walked door-to-door, talking to friends, neighbors, and strangers about their idea. They collected over 22,000 signatures — more than 10 percent of all the voters in St. Louis — on a petition for a ballot initiative. The city’s elections board<a href="http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/anti-coal-initiative-heading-for-april-ballot/article_c74ff1da-de8b-529a-9134-70bbd82ed4c9.html" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;"> verified the signatures</a>, and began preparing to print ballots.

This is where you might expect to hear about a vigorous election campaign, with arguments from both sides put to the voters, a spirited debate about the future of St. Louis and our planet, and finally, the voters making their choice at the ballot box. You might even expect to hear about the coal company spending millions of dollars to fight the initiative in the days before the vote.

But you’d be wrong: There was no vote. Instead, the<a href="http://www.stinsonleonard.com/uploadedFiles/Content/News_and_Events/In_the_News/2013_In_the_News/Dueker_STLBJReprint_Character.pdf" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;"> coal company’s lawyers</a> rushed<a href="http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/lawsuit-seeks-to-block-anti-coal-measure-from-ballot/article_c2d61509-55cf-5199-9630-dc2f2c72b5d5.html" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;"> to court</a> and asked a judge to <a href="http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/judge-halts-election-limiting-tax-breaks" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">block the election</a> on the grounds that the law would unfairly discriminate against the coal company and its business partners, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. The judge <a href="http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/judge-halts-election-limiting-tax-breaks" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">agreed</a>, and <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/206544694/Sustainable-Energy-Order-Feb-11-2014" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">cited the Supreme Court’s infamous Citizens United decision</a> for the theory that business entities “are entitled to constitutional protection as citizens.” He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the vote, and scheduled a trial for March 31.

At the <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/morning_call/2014/03/anti-coal-initiative-heads-back-to-st-louis-court.html?ana=twt" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">trial</a>, Take Back St. Louis <a href="http://www.freespeechforpeople.org/sites/default/files/SLSF%20Post%20Trial%20Brief-Final.pdf#page=21" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">provided evidence</a> about the environmental damage caused by burning coal, and the damage to the fabric of St. Louis caused by the city’s penchant for giving away public dollars to big business. The other side <a href="http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/666" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">didn’t put any witnesses on the stand</a>. The judge may make his final decision any day now.

Not everyone will agree that this ballot initiative is the best policy, and that’s fine. The Take Back St. Louis folks think they can convince a majority of St. Louis voters, and they’re willing to take on the coal interests in a contest for votes. But first, the court has to get out of the way. Now that the judge has the evidence, he has a chance to get this right, lift his injunction, and let the vote proceed.

Whether or not you think that giving tax breaks to coal companies and their business partners is a good idea, we should all agree that this is a question for voters, not judges. Because it was bad enough when coal companies could simply open their checkbooks to flood elections with unlimited spending; now they won’t even let people vote.

</section><a id="grist-end-of-article" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 100%;">

</a><a id="grist-end-of-article" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 100%;"> </a><a id="grist-end-of-article" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 100%;"> </a>

<a id="grist-end-of-article" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 100%;"> </a><a id="grist-end-of-article" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 100%;">Ron Fein is the Legal Director for </a><a href="http://freespeechforpeople.org/" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;">Free Speech For People</a>, an organization dedicated to challenging the misuse of corporate power and restoring republican democracy to the people.

</section>

<a href="http://grist.org/business-technology/do-coal-companies-have-more-rights-than-voters/">http://grist.org/business-technology/do-coal-companies-have-more-rights-than-voters/</a>

=

Lafayette, CO residents passed a measure to ban <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/fracking-2/" target="blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: transparent; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">fracking</a> within city limits in November, yet they’re still fighting for clean air and <a href="http://ecowatch.com/water-news/" target="blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: transparent; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">water</a>.

A month after elections, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association filed a lawsuit against the City of Lafayette to overturn the newly passed Community Bill of Rights. Now, residents are turning the tables back on the association, as well as the state and Gov. John Hickenlooper in a first-of-its-kind, class-action lawsuit filed Tuesday in Boulder County District Court.

While the suit centers on fracking, it seeks to protect the citizens’ right to self-governance under the Community Bill of Rights. The residents allege that the Colorado Oil and Gas Act and the industry’s enforcement of it violate that right to local self-government under the U.S. Constitution.

“This class action lawsuit is merely the first of many by people across the United States whose constitutional rights to govern their own communities are routinely violated by state governments working in concert with the corporations that they ostensibly regulate,” said Thomas Linzey, Esq., executive director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, which helped craft Lafayette’s Community Bill of Rights.

“The people of Lafayette will not stand idly by as their rights are negotiated away by oil and gas corporations, their state government, and their own municipal government.”

The suit comes after Hickenlooper <a href="http://www.coloradoindependent.com/147745/draft-local-control-fracking-bill-fails-to-launch-special-legislative-session" target="blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: transparent; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">postponed a special legislative session</a> with energy industry representatives who wanted to get fracking control back from the residents in Lafayette, Longmont and other towns with <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2013/11/06/huge-election-victories-colorados-anti-fracking-movement/" target="blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: transparent; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">local control over fracking</a>. Eleven environmental groups <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/05/29/colorado-groups-hickenlooper/" target="_blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: transparent; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">have demanded they be allowed in such a meeting</a> if it ever takes place.

——–

YOU ALSO MIGHT LIKE

<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/05/29/colorado-groups-hickenlooper/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Colorado Groups Demand Access To Gov. Hickenlooper’s Secret Fracking Meeting</a>

<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/02/24/ballot-initiative-coloradans-fracking/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Groups Launch Ballot Initiative to Give Coloradans Local Control Over Fracking</a>

<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2013/11/06/huge-election-victories-colorados-anti-fracking-movement/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">Huge Election Victories for Colorado’s Anti-Fracking Movement</a>

===

afp, not alec  named, but block local regs/transit  <a href="http://grist.org/cities/states-try-to-block-cities-transit-plans/">http://grist.org/cities/states-try-to-block-cities-transit-plans/</a>

==

nestle mt shasta <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/CA%20-%20Shasta%20Water%20Rights%20Report.pdf">http://celdf.org/downloads/CA%20-%20Shasta%20Water%20Rights%20Report.pdf</a>

==

No matter where I traveled to – Utah, Colorado, Pennsylvania, West Virginia – the disputes about extreme energy always came back to that idea of place, people’s love of where they live. The issue is further complicated by the fact that, in many states, mineral rights have been severed from the surface land. Known as “split estate,” this means that people who own their homes sometimes do not own the minerals underneath them. These homeowners are powerless on their own property.

Many residents also feel powerless in their communities; corporate interests usually trump local concerns. As extreme energy has rippled beyond the coalfields of Appalachia, more places are feeling the burden of the “resource curse.” It has splintered communities – pitted neighbor against neighbor – and revealed a nation sharply divided about our energy future. Social unrest accompanies environmental upheaval.   <a href="http://www.alternet.org/print/environment/extreme-energy-extraction-roadtrip-scary-ways-were-ruining-country-get-fossil-fuels">http://www.alternet.org/print/environment/extreme-energy-extraction-roadtrip-scary-ways-were-ruining-country-get-fossil-fuels</a>

===

An energy tax is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax" title="Tax" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">tax</a> that increases the price of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy" title="Energy" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">energy</a> (Fisher et al., 1996, p. 416).<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; white-space: nowrap;">[1]</a> Arguments in favour of energy taxes have included the pursuit of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroeconomic" title="Macroeconomic" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">macroeconomic</a> objectives, e.g., <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_deficit" title="Fiscal deficit" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">fiscal deficit</a> reduction in the 1990s, as well as environmental benefits, i.e., reduced pollution (Nellor, 1994, p. 1).<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; white-space: nowrap;">[2]</a> A weakness of energy taxes is that they impose a burden (or cost) in the form of reduced economic output and employment (p. 19).

<h2 style="font-weight: bold; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: none; display: inline; background-image: none;">Contents</h2>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#" class="internal" id="togglelink" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">hide</a>] </div>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#United_States" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">1 United States</a>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-2" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#Colorado" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">1.1 Colorado</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#References" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">2 References</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 19.2px; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-image: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">United States<span class="mw-editsection mw-editsection-expanded" style="-webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; padding-right: 0.25em; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate; direction: ltr;">[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Energy_tax&action=edit&section=1" title="Edit section: United States" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">edit source</a> | <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Energy_tax&veaction=edit&section=1" title="Edit section: United States" class="mw-editsection-visualeditor" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">editbeta</a>]</h2>

<p style="margin: 0.4em 0px 0.5em; line-height: 19.2px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In 1993, then President <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton" title="Bill Clinton" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Bill Clinton</a> proposed a BTU tax. A BTU tax is a type of energy tax (Baron, 1997, p. 14).<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; white-space: nowrap;">[3]</a> The tax would have taxed all fuel sources based on their heat content except for wind, solar, and geothermal. It was never adopted. The BTU tax passed the House, but was rejected by the Senate in light of the lobbying effort mobilized against its adoption. The rejected proposal was watered down, as the Clinton administration tried to salvage their efforts by offering to exempt manufacturers and base the tax on the cost rather than the heat content of energy.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; white-space: nowrap;">[4]</a> Many of the House Democrats who voted for the tax and who lost their seats in the 1994 midterm election, blamed their loss on their vote for the BTU tax. Getting "BTU'd" became Beltway slang at the time for those who lost reelection by voting for the controversial proposal.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#cite_note-5" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; white-space: nowrap;">[5]</a>

<h3 style="font-weight: bold; margin: 0px 0px 0.3em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-style: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 19.2px; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-image: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Colorado<span class="mw-editsection mw-editsection-expanded" style="-webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; padding-right: 0.25em; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate; direction: ltr;">[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Energy_tax&action=edit&section=2" title="Edit section: Colorado" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">edit source</a> | <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Energy_tax&veaction=edit&section=2" title="Edit section: Colorado" class="mw-editsection-visualeditor" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">editbeta</a>]</h3>

<p style="margin: 0.4em 0px 0.5em; line-height: 19.2px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">On 7 November 2006, citizens of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulder_Colorado" title="Boulder Colorado" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Boulder Colorado</a> (a college town with roughly 100,000 residents situated in the foothills of the Rocky Mtns) voted in favor of initiative 202, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Action_Plan" title="Climate Action Plan" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Climate Action Plan</a> Tax. This marks the first time in the nation that a municipal government has imposed an energy tax directly upon its residents to combat global warming. The CAP tax applies to energy consumption with deductions for carbon-neutral and renewable energy sources (such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcel_Energy" title="Xcel Energy" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Xcel Energy</a>’s WindSource). The tax appears on consumer’s energy bills, and is used to fund the city’s Office of Environmental Affairs which, is in charge of programs designed to reduce Boulder's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_footprint" title="Carbon footprint" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">carbon footprint</a>.

The CAP tax will generate roughly $1 million annually. The City Council has the authority to increase the rates as needed. As of October 2009, the rate is assigned as follows:<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tax#cite_note-6" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; white-space: nowrap;">[6]</a>

<table class="wikitable" style="margin: 1em 0px; border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); border-collapse: collapse; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 19.2px; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(249, 249, 249);"><tbody><tr><th style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em; background-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); text-align: center;">Electricity User Type</th><th style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em; background-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); text-align: center;">Tax Rate</th><th style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em; background-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); text-align: center;">Average Annual Tax</th></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">Residential</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">$0.0049/kWh</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">$21</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">Commercial</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">$0.0009/kWh</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">$94</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">Industrial</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">$0.0003/kWh</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">$9,600</td></tr></tbody></table>

==

alec conf:

<li style=" text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; line-height: 17.600000381469727px; list-style-image: url(http://www.prwatch.org/sites/all/themes/fusion/fusion_starter/images/list-level-1.png);">New ways to thwart local democratic control by prohibiting city or county governments from regulating genetically modified plant seeds. Members of the Agriculture Subcommittee -- which is chaired by Jeff Case of CropLife America -- will consider a bill to thwart local democratic control by prohibiting city or local governments from regulating genetically modified plant seeds, which happens to benefit many members of CropLife's trade association and other big ag companies. Contrary to Jeffersonian principles of local democracy, for years ALEC has promoted bills to preempt local efforts to establish everything from paid sick days to municipal broadband.</li>

</ul>

===

Western Tradition Partnership (WTP), headed by Bozeman, Montana Republicans (former US representative Ron Marlenee [doc in cache] and state representative John Sinrud) is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit against Longmont over electioneering provisions and independent expenditures in the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act. [incumbent protection"]

<font style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" face="Times New Roman">WTP/ATP also <font style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" face="Times New Roman">fights laws that restrict corporate money in elections or require disclosure of contributions.<font style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" face="Times New Roman"> In 2009, the group sued Longmont, CO over their Fair Campaign Practices Act. The city <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Tradition_Partnership#Longmont" style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">settled</a><font style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"> and agreed to drop disclosure requirements.

===

chatanooga fight on city fibre; http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Crawfo

==

The land-transfer bills, when paired with recent bills regulating oil and gas development, also point to serious internal conflicts over “local control.” State lawmakers tout the importance of giving locals a strong voice in how land is managed, rather than handing down federal dictates. Yet, because they also want to make it easy for industry to operate, they’re often reluctant to cede authority down to the city and county level.

Idaho Gov. Butch Otter, a Republican who often talks about “local control” over natural resources, signed a law in March preventing counties and cities from banning or even regulating oil and gas drilling. While local governments retain some say in zoning and planning, the state’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission has final authority. Colorado has taken a similar stance; two counties tried to pass their own drilling regulations this spring, only to receive a warning letter from the state’s attorney general and its oil and gas commission stating that “responsible government requires uniform regulation” at the state level. Counties can hire their own well inspectors and exercise some limited influence over surface impacts like dust and noise, but can’t prohibit drilling or set rules for “downhole” activities like hydraulic fracturing. Colorado lawmakers are also now considering a bill to punish local governments that “restrict or delay” oil or gas production, by preventing them from receiving their share of severance taxes.

“Legislators say we need one-size-fits-all regulation for oil and gas development at the state level,” says Bruce Baizel, senior staff attorney at Earthworks. “Then they turn that same argument against the federal government and say, ‘One size doesn’t fit all.’” Baizel predicts lawsuits from local governments: “These states have taken away people’s basic right to say ‘no.’” see wise use

==

In April 2005, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Issue_Dynamics" title="Issue Dynamics" class="mw-redirect">Issue Dynamics</a>, Inc (IDI) "launched a formal Blogger Relations Practice and a companion website, <a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="http://www.bloggerrelations.com">http://www.bloggerrelations.com</a>." The firm's press release stated, "IDI Blogger Relations clients have already included Fortune 50 corporations, national trade associations, advocacy groups and political party committees." The practice includes a "robust blog monitoring service," to provide clients with "actionable intelligence." Other practice offerings include "Blogger Outreach," Blog Building" (a "simple, inexpensive way to build a community for messaging, rapid response & brand protection, fundraising, analysis, and a host of other activities"), "Training" and "Blog Advertising." <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.idi.net/proactive/newsroom/release.vtml?id=20872&PROACTIVE_ID=cecfcfc6cecccdcfc9c5cecfcfcfc5cecec8c8c9cdc9c8c8c9c5cf">[7]</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.idi.net/internet/blogger.vtml">[8]</a>

Noting IDI's new practice, journalist, author and grassroots journalism advocate <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Dan_Gillmor" title="Dan Gillmor">Dan Gillmor</a> wrote, "As eWeek <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1759948,00.asp">reported</a> in February, a subsidiary of the firm issued a report denouncing municipal wireless installations without making clear that big telecom firms, which vehemently oppose municipal wireless systems, are among the firm's chief funders. (See also Glenn Fleishman's '<a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/004780.html">sock puppets</a>' piece about this.) ... One of the imperatives in the emerging citizen journalism sphere will be to ferret out and tell readers about these techniques, in a systematic and lasting way." <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/04/blogger_relatio.html">[9]</a>

</div>

<a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20130617/fracking-bill-triggers-rift-among-illinois-green-groups">http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20130617/fracking-bill-triggers-rift-among-illinois-green-groups</a>

===

<a href="http://grist.org/news/colorado-city-wants-more-than-just-a-ban-on-fracking/">http://grist.org/news/colorado-city-wants-more-than-just-a-ban-on-fracking/</a>

The latest effort by a group of Coloradans to protect their community from frackers goes further than the bans and moratoriums <a href="http://grist.org/news/boulder-and-other-colorado-cities-try-to-fight-fracking/" target="_blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">recently put in place by Boulder, Fort Collins, and Longmont</a>.

Residents of Lafayette, Colo., which has a population of 25,000, are collecting signatures in an effort to place a <a href="http://www.eastbocounited.org/blog/archives/2013/06/10/" target="_blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">charter amendment</a> on an upcoming ballot that would ban all new oil and gas extraction and establish a far-reaching community bill of rights.

Among other things, the bill of rights would proclaim that residents “possess a right to a sustainable, healthy energy future” and the “right to be free from involuntary chemical trespass including toxins, carcinogens, particulates, nucleotides, hydrocarbons and other substances.” It would also declare that ecosystems “possess unalienable and fundamental rights to exist and flourish within the City of Lafayette.”

The activists hope such a bill would help assure them clean air and clean water — the very things that are threatened by the fracking industry and its friends in government. The industry enjoys <a href="http://grist.org/list/colorado-governor-participated-in-ritual-like-drinking-of-fracking-fluid/" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">strong support from Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D)</a>, who has pledged to sue cities in his state that impose bans on fracking.....

===

before ag ashcroft let developers challenge local ords as unConst 182 yet stopped states from stopping offshore drill b/c fed has jurisdict; // limited state use of class action lawsuits 182 13 of 16 ppl in cab from indus affected by cas 183 says Fdn fr taxpayer and consumer rights  strat

==

<h1 class="headline" style=" text-align: left;"><a class="post-title" href="http://grist.org/news/boulder-and-other-colorado-cities-try-to-fight-fracking/">Boulder and other Colorado cities try to fight fracking</a></h1>

By <a href="http://grist.org/author/john-upton/" title="Posts by John Upton">John Upton</a>

update:  Maybe it's the polluted <a href="http://grist.org/news/study-links-fracking-to-drinking-water-pollution/" style="line-height: 22.7969px; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">groundwater</a>, <a href="http://grist.org/news/fracking-accident-frack-cident-leaks-benzene-into-colorado-stream/" style="line-height: 22.7969px; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">river water</a>, and <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/ci_20210720/cu-denver-study-links-fracking-higher-concentration-air" target="_blank" style="line-height: 22.7969px; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">air</a>. Perhaps it's the <a href="http://grist.org/news/lawmakers-seek-answers-after-oil-gushes-during-colorado-floods/" style="line-height: 22.7969px; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">toxic stew</a> that gushed over Colorado when it flooded. Or it could be the <a href="http://grist.org/news/co-fracking-petition-a-fraud/" style="line-height: 22.7969px; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">abject lies</a>.

Whatever the fracking industry has done to earn the hostility of voters in at least three Colorado cities, it couldn't be undone by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a pro-fracking ad blitz in recent weeks.

On Tuesday, voters in Boulder, Fort Collins, and Lafayette all approved measures that either banned or placed a moratorium on the practice of hydraulic fracturing. Boulder was the most decisive: Three-quarters of votes cast were in opposition to fracking. A similar initiative in Broomfield was failing by a mere 13 votes at the end of unofficial counting.

==

hope?

Local elections in Washington state are big deal for coal industry and global climate

By John Upton

Bellingham, Wash., coastlineMatt RayBellingham in Whatcom County, Wash., could soon be seeing a whole lot of coal.

The adage “think global, act local” rings remarkably true in Whatcom County, Wash., a rural area in the northwestern corner of the country.

===

Missouri: <a href="http://www.alternet.org/print/food/look-out-corporations-promote-right-farm">http://www.alternet.org/print/food/look-out-corporations-promote-right-farm</a>

<div class="byline environment" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.populist.com">Progressive Populist</a> [1] / By <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/margot-ford-mcmillen">Margot Ford McMillen</a> [2]</div>

<h1 property="dc:title" datatype="" class="node-title" style=" text-align: left;">Look Out: Corporations Promote ‘Right to Farm’</h1>

</div>

Every year for the last six or eight, family farmers and small-town residents in Missouri have had to fight off legislations designed to take away our local control and put all the lawmaking privileges in the hands of state lawmakers. Taken to the extreme, this would mean that county, city and township ordinances and laws would be void. No more city zoning, no health ordinances guaranteeing special treatment such as special regulations against noise, air pollution, water pollution and so forth, for county residents that demanded it.

The beneficiaries of these laws would be corporate do-badders who want to export costs like cleanups or health care for employees. Without regulations, they could get taxpayers to pay for pollution and social justice atrocities. It would be business as usual for them, only better!

This year, we have been dealing with bills introduced simultaneously in the Missouri House of Representatives and Senate to ensure “modern farming practices” forever. The resolutions on the House side said, “No state law shall be enacted which abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology and modern livestock production and ranching practices, unless enacted by the General Assembly.”

Never mind that “agricultural technology,” “modern livestock production,” “ranching practices” are not defined. And never mind that they would seem to suggest methods of production like Confined Animal Feeding Operations and genetically altered crops. If these resolutions passed, citizens would be asked to vote this dangerous language into our state constitution. Where it would reside forever.

As I write this, just a few days after tax day, it looks like we’ve beaten back this particular monster. It is possible, of course, that all we’ve done is cut off one head to reveal two or three more, but the citizens have been calling lawmakers, pointing out the errors of the bills, and gaining support as the session moves forward.

But here’s the larger question: Where the heck did this idea of changing the constitution come from? We know who it benefits — the industrial agriculture system — and we know who it hurts — ordinary citizens. But who wrote this bill, now called “right to farm,” and who financed the possibility that it would get traction?

Thanks to the magic of Google, I quickly found three states with efforts for constitutional amendments similar to Missouri’s proposals. Another few keystrokes and I found the source of the language. It came from ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council. And on the ALEC website, a few more clicks took me to the list of legislative members from Missouri.

In November 2012, North Dakota, a state besieged with fracking (and, yes, ALEC has policies and sample legislation favoring that subject also) passed a “right to farm” amendment into the constitution. Its language is eerily like the proposal in Missouri: The right of farmers and ranchers to engage in modern farming and ranching practices shall be forever guaranteed in this state. No law shall be enacted which abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology, modern livestock production and ranching practices.

While you might think this guarantees farmers against the frackers, please note the seriously vague and troubling words “modern,” “technology,” and the confusing phrase “no law shall be enacted …” So, in North Dakota, no county, township, parish, city or any governmental body will be able to pass a law or ordinance to protect themselves from chemicals, GMOs, CAFOs or any other kind of industrial farming scheme.

Not only will farmers be affected. This amendment can have serious repercussions for consumers: North Dakota, one of our chief wheat-raising states, will not be able to refuse to plant untested (and untrusted) GMO wheat under this Constitutional clause.

The same sort of language is being considered in Montana, another primary wheat-raising state, and in Indiana, one of the buckles on the corn belt. The Hoosier experience, summed up by Indiana’s TribStar.com, sounds just like Missouri. They say:

“House Joint Resolution 5 and Senate Joint Resolution 27, identical pieces of legislation making their way through the two chambers, seek to amend the Indiana Constitution to prevent any legislative body from adopting any rules regulating farming ...

“The amendment, apparently, would prevent any rules regulating large industrial agricultural businesses such as confined animal feeding operations. It would also prevent any laws that protect public health and private property rights for Hoosiers who are not farmers. Even zoning laws could be challenged.”

These dangerous laws could spell the end of rural life and the endorsement of fields farmed with robot tractors, sprayed by drones carrying Agent Orange and growing untested GMO crops with serious health consequences.

State by state, beginning in Indiana this fall, voters will confront this amendment and industry will spend the big bucks to get it passed. Find out if it’s active in your state, and who supports it.

Then call your friends and neighbors and work to defeat it.

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">See more stories tagged with:</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/right-farm" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">Right to farm</a> [3],</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/missouri-house-representatives" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">Missouri House of Representatives</a> [4],</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/confined-animal-feeding-operations" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">confined animal feeding operations</a> [5],</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/constitution" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">constitution</a> [6],</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/deregulation" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">deregulation</a> [7],</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/american-legislative-exchange-council" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">american legislative exchange council</a> [9],</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/north-dakota" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">north dakota</a> [12],</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/house-joint-resolution-5" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">house joint resolution 5</a> [13],</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/senate-joint-resolution-27" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">senate joint resolution 27</a> [14],</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/modern-farming-practices" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel">modern farming practices</a> [15]</div>

</div>

<div class="print-source_url" style=" text-align: left;">Source URL: <a href="http://www.alternet.org/food/look-out-corporations-promote-right-farm">http://www.alternet.org/food/look-out-corporations-promote-right-farm</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Links:</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[1] http://www.populist.com</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/margot-ford-mcmillen</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[3] http://www.alternet.org/tags/right-farm</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[4] http://www.alternet.org/tags/missouri-house-representatives</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[5] http://www.alternet.org/tags/confined-animal-feeding-operations</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[6] http://www.alternet.org/tags/constitution</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[7] http://www.alternet.org/tags/deregulation</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[8] http://www.alternet.org/tags/alec</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[9] http://www.alternet.org/tags/american-legislative-exchange-council</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[10] http://www.alternet.org/tags/gmo</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[11] http://www.alternet.org/tags/cafo</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[12] http://www.alternet.org/tags/north-dakota</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[13] http://www.alternet.org/tags/house-joint-resolution-5</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[14] http://www.alternet.org/tags/senate-joint-resolution-27</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[15] http://www.alternet.org/tags/modern-farming-practices</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[16] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B</div>

</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">illinois hog lagoon http://videos.huffingtonpost.com/former-global-warming-skeptic-changes-views-517431870</div>

===

maybe not local but corp personhood:

<div style=" text-align: left;">For those who have a copy of Jeffrey Clement Corporations are not People, he has a long discussion of the case,  International Dairy Foods Assoc. v Amestoy (1996), in which the Federal District Court struck down the Vermont Law based on the corporationâ€™ s First Amendment rights.  (Pages 39-45 in Clementsâ€™ book.)</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Since Bovine Growth Hormone is associated with higher incidence of some cancers as well as the increase in anti-biotic resistant bacteria, and is banned in most advanced countries of the world, telling the people of Vermont that they didnâ€™t even have the right to know that this substance was in their food,  is one of the most dramatic examples of how extending constitutional rights to corporations has taken away fundamental rights of people.</div>

Students can be silenced when they say something that can remotely be interpreted as favoring illegal drugs. Contrast this with the right of tobacco corporations to advertise their addictive drug directly to students. In a case called Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, the Court voided a Massachusetts law forbidding tobacco billboards within 1,000 feet of a school. In fact, the Court went further and held that, under the First Amendment, the state could not even require smokeless tobacco and cigar advertisements in stores to be posted a minimum of five feet above the floor, so that toddlers would be protected from colorful cartoons of Joe Camel.

==

Democ School:

<div style=" text-align: left;">Self-Government</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Curriculum Selections</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/Model%20Brief.pdf">Model Brief on Corporate “Rights” </a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * Jane Anne Morris, <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/Commerce%20Clause%20-%20Jane%20Anne%20Morris%20excerpt%20Gaveling%20.pdf">Gaveling Down The Rabble.</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * Peter Kellman, You’ve Hard of Santa Clara, Now Meet Dartmouth.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/DARTMOUTH%20CHART.pdf">Dartmouth Chart</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/Municipal%20Charters%20-%20Jon%20C.%20Teaford.pdf">Jon Teaford, Municipal Charters</a>.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * John Forrest Dillion, LL.D., <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/John%20F.%20Dillon%20-%20No%20Right%20to%20Local%20Self-Government%20-%20Municipal%20Corporat.pdf">Commentaries on the Law of Municipal Corporations.</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * Ben Price, <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/Municipal%20v.%20Business%20corporation%20charters%20graphics.pdf">The Corporate Counter-Revolution Chart</a>.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * Arthur Selwyn Miller, The Modern Corporate State (1976).</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">THEMES</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">   1. Accumulations of property and capital, in the form of the corporation, have been given constitutional "rights" and protections over the past one hundred and thirty years.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">   2. As early as 1819, corporations were recognized as being protected by the Contracts Clause of the Constitution, making their corporate charters exempt from unilateral authority exercised by the State seeking to change the charter.</div>

</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">   3. Even though private corporations and municipal corporations are both corporations, that separate sets of law have evolved which empower private corporations but keep municipal corporations under very strict State control.</div>

</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">   4. The system of law guarantees that the rights of private corporations and their decisionmakers will almost always trump the rights of communities, even though municipal corporations ostensibly represent “we the people.”</div>

</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">   5. The system of law does not recognize a right of local self-government, but that municipalities are wholly controlled by State governments, as a parent/child relationship.</div>

</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">   6. The Commerce Clause has been used by corporations and the courts to strip state and municipal governments of lawmaking in the area of commerce, and that major environmental, labor, and civil rights laws were passed under the authority of that Clause.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">   7. The accumulation of rights for corporate minorities combined with the corporate grip on culture, has resulted in the creation of a Corporate State.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Section “G” – Shaping a Movement: Communities Assert Local Self-Governance in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia and Beyond</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Curriculum Selections</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * The Pennsylvania Story</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * Strategic "Boxes" - Reframing Single Issues, Adopting Rights-Based Local Law, Drawing the "right response" from the Corporate State, and Building larger Coalitions            </div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * <a href="http://celdf.org/article.php?list=type&type=40">Home Rule</a>, Local Constitutions, and Building Community Government from Rights, as a Foundation</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">    * <a href="http://celdf.org/article.php?list=type&type=42">The Rights of Nature</a></div>

<a href="http://celdf.org/our-work-issues-gas-drilling-non-rights-based-fracking-ordinances">Non-Rights-Based Ordinances</a>

The communities being sued for their attempts to regulate or prohibit gas drilling and fracking are the ones that adopted non-rights-based ordinances. They base their ordinances on state regulatory law and receive the blessings of municipal solicitors that the ordinances are legal. And when the corporations sue, the laws are stacked on behalf of the corporations: violations of their constitutional and civil rights. The corporations win. The communities lose.

<a href="http://celdf.org/our-work-issues-gas-drilling-non-rights-based-fracking-ordinances">Click here to learn more about Non-Rights-Based Ordinances </a>

<div class="post_header" style=" text-align: left;">March 07, 2013 / BY CAMPAIGN STAFF <a href="http://colorofchange.org/blog/2013/mar/7/alec-model-ban-municipal-broadband-hits-georgia/">ALEC "model" ban on municipal broadband hits Georgia statehouse</a></div>

UPDATE (03/08/13): After more than 1,500 Georgia ColorOfChange members rallied to action, Georgia's House resoundingly rejected HB 282 on a bipartisan 70-94 vote.

Today, the Georgia House of Representatives is voting on a bill to ban local governments from creating broadband Internet networks even when most residents have no option for private broadband service. HB 282 is being pushed by Big Telecom, and got its start as a "model" bill from the <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/03/12010/community-owned-internet-long-targeted-alec-and-big-telecom-under-fire-georgia" target="blank">corporate bill mill the American Legislative Exchange Council</a> (ALEC).

We're urging Georgia lawmakers to reject this giveaway to the telecom industry and protect the right to connect for all communities. Read the email we sent to our members after the jump, and if you live in Georgia please <a href="http://act.colorofchange.org/sign/municipal_broadband/" target="blank">urge your Representative to vote NO</a> on HB 282.

</div>

<h1 style=" text-align: left;">Our Longmont, others act to protect fracking ban</h1>

<div class="date" style=" text-align: left;">March 12, 2013</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">By <a href="http://www.freerangelongmont.com/author/kayefissinger/" title="Posts by Kaye Fissinger" rel="author">Kaye Fissinger</a></div>

</div>

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 11, 2013

<div style=" text-align: left;">CONTACTS:</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Kaye Fissinger, 303-678-7267 (Our Longmont)</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Michael Bellmont, 303-678-9470 (Our Longmont)</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Bruce Baizel, 970-903-5326 (Earthworks)</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Shane Davis, 303-717-4462 (Sierra Club)</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Sam Schabacker, 720-295-1036 (Food & Water Watch)</div>

Coalition Acts to Protect City of Longmont’s Ban on Dangerous Hydraulic Fracturing

LONGMONT, CO – Today, a coalition of community, public health, consumer and environmental organizations filed a motion in the Weld County District Court to intervene in the Colorado Oil and Gas Association’s lawsuit that seeks to invalidate Longmont’s ban of the oil and gas practice known as “fracking” and related surface activities, such as storage of toxic post-fracking fluids. This ban was instituted by the citizens of Longmont in an amendment to the City Charter, Article XVI , the Longmont Public Health, Safety and Wellness Act.

The people of Longmont by an overwhelming vote of 60% (more than 25,000 people), voted in the November, 2012 election to amend the City Charter to ban fracking, affirming their intention “to protect themselves from the harms associated with hydraulic fracturing, including threats to public health and safety, property damage and diminished property values, poor air quality, destruction of landscape, and pollution of drinking and surface water.” This historic ballot measure was spearheaded by Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont (Our Longmont).

“We are taking this action because we hope to affirm the rights of citizens and communities to guarantee a safe and healthy environment for themselves and future generations,” said Michael Harris, Director of the University Of Denver Sturm College Of Law Environmental Law Clinic. He continued, “We are honored to represent Our Longmont, Food & Water Watch, the Sierra Club and Earthworks.”

The Colorado Constitution confers on all individuals certain inalienable rights. These rights are expressed in the Colorado Oil and Gas Act, which requires that oil and gas resources be extracted in a “manner consistent with the protection of public health, safety and welfare.”

“The extraction process of hydraulic fracturing has not been proven to be safe,” said Kaye Fissinger, managing member of Our Longmont. “Further, the State of Colorado has created a situation where the commission that oversees the oil and gas industry has an inherent conflict of interest. It cannot simultaneously foster the development of oil and gas and protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens.”

“The dangerous, toxic practice of fracking has been a matter of grave importance to the people of Longmont since October of 2011,” said Michael Bellmont, spokesperson for Our Longmont. “To assure the protection of those in our community, Our Longmont undertook a petition drive to place the charter amendment on the ballot. In November, our citizens exercised their rights to self-determination, also guaranteed under Article XX of Colorado’s Constitution. In light of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association’s attack, it is necessary that citizens participate in the judicial process to guarantee our constitutionally protected rights. It is for this reason Our Longmont and others have moved to intervene,” Bellmont said.

Food & Water Watch provided invaluable assistance to Our Longmont throughout the effort to qualify and pass Longmont’s charter amendment. Sam Schabacker, Mountain West Regional Director for the organization, said, “We were delighted to be able to help the citizens of Longmont prohibit the dangerous industrial practice of hydraulic fracking and are pleased to be able to continue to support them. We have every confidence that the courts will reject the claims of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association and preserve Longmont’s constitutional and home rule rights.”

According to Eric E. Huber, Senor Managing Attorney for the Sierra Club Environmental Law Program, “This lawsuit could have a precedential effect throughout Colorado as other communities work to pass similar prohibitions on fracking and the disposal of its waste products within their boundaries."

Bruce Baizel, Director of Earthworks’ Oil & Gas Accountability Project, said, “The citizens of Longmont took this action because they don’t trust state regulators to protect them. Rather than sue communities acting to protect their public health, industry and the state should be addressing legitimate community concerns by putting the public’s health before industry profits.”

Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont, is a group of concerned citizens from throughout Longmont. We believe that Longmont has a constitutional right to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of our community. Our goal is to preserve the quality of life in our exceptional city. By so doing we will preserve our economic vitality, our home values, our water, parks, wildlife, lakes, trails, streams, open space, and recreational areas for ourselves and future generations. www.ourlongmont.org,

Food & Water Watch is a consumer organization that advocates for common sense policies that will result in healthy, safe food and access to safe and affordable drinking water. It’s essential that these shared resources be regulated in the public interest rather than for private gain. www.foodandwaterwater.org,

Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization with more than 2.1 million members and supporters nationwide, including 160 members in the City of Longmont. In addition to creating opportunities for people of all ages, levels and locations to have meaningful outdoor experiences, the Sierra Club works to safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying and litigation. http://rmc.sierraclub.org

For 25 years, Earthworks has been dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking sustainable solutions. http://www.earthworksaction.org.

Technorati Tags: <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Bruce+Baizel" rel="tag" target="self">Bruce Baizel</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/City+of+Longmont" rel="tag" target="self">City of Longmont</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Colorado+Constitution" rel="tag" target="self">Colorado Constitution</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Colorado+Oil+and+Gas+Commmission" rel="tag" target="self">Colorado Oil and Gas Commmission</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Denver+University+Environmental+Law+Clinic" rel="tag" target="self">Denver University Environmental Law Clinic</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Earthwork%27s+Oil+and+Gas+Accountability+Project" rel="tag" target="self">Earthwork's Oil and Gas Accountability Project</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Earthworks" rel="tag" target="self">Earthworks</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Eric+E.+Huber" rel="tag" target="self">Eric E. Huber</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Food+%26amp%3B+Water+Watch" rel="tag" target="self">Food & Water Watch</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/fracking" rel="tag" target="self">fracking</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/fracking+ban" rel="tag" target="self">fracking ban</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/fracking+flowback" rel="tag" target="self">fracking flowback</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/fracking+produced+water" rel="tag" target="self">fracking produced water</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/hydraulic+fracturing" rel="tag" target="self">hydraulic fracturing</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Kaye+Fissinger" rel="tag" target="self">Kaye Fissinger</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/longmont" rel="tag" target="self">longmont</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+ballot+measure" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont ballot measure</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+charter+amendment" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont charter amendment</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+Charter+Amendment+Article+XVI" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont Charter Amendment Article XVI</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+City+Charter" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont City Charter</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+lawsuit" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont lawsuit</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+lawsuit+intervenors" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont lawsuit intervenors</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Longmont+Public+Halth+Safety+and+Wellness+Act" rel="tag" target="self">Longmont Public Halth Safety and Wellness Act</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Michael+Bellmont" rel="tag" target="self">Michael Bellmont</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Michael+Harris" rel="tag" target="self">Michael Harris</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/oil+and+gas+drilling" rel="tag" target="self">oil and gas drilling</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/oil+and+gas+industry" rel="tag" target="self">oil and gas industry</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Our+Health+Our+Future+Our+Longmont" rel="tag" target="self">Our Health Our Future Our Longmont</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Sam+Schabacker" rel="tag" target="self">Sam Schabacker</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Shane+Davis" rel="tag" target="self">Shane Davis</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Sierra+Club" rel="tag" target="self">Sierra Club</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Sierra+Club+Environmental+Law+Program" rel="tag" target="self">Sierra Club Environmental Law Program</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Sierra+Club+Rocky+Mountain+Chapter" rel="tag" target="self">Sierra Club Rocky Mountain Chapter</a>, <a class="technorati-link" href="http://technorati.com/tag/Sturm+College+of+Law" rel="tag" target="self">Sturm College of Law</a>

</div>

<h1 class="headline" style=" text-align: left;">Mississippi poised to pass ‘Anti-Bloomberg’ bill banning healthy food regs</h1>

By <a href="http://grist.org/author/susie-cagle/" title="Posts by Susie Cagle">Susie Cagle</a>

Mississippi is just the kind of place one might expect to find a backlash against the "organic agenda.” Apparently spurred on by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s (<a href="http://grist.org/news/nyc-judge-throws-out-bloombergs-big-sugar-drink-ban/">newly tossed out</a>) pet ban on big sodas, Mississippi is currently on the verge of passing a bill that would bar every local government in the state from requiring that restaurants post calorie counts or cap portion sizes.

A far-reaching, big-government bill to counter other far-reaching, big-government bills? Uh, sure, Mississippi. <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/03/12/174048623/mississippi-passes-anti-bloomberg-bill">NPR has the full scary deets</a>:

“The Anti-Bloomberg Bill” garnered wide bipartisan support in both chambers of the legislature in a state where one in three adults is obese, the highest rate in the nation.

The bill is expected to be signed by Gov. Phil Bryant, a Republican. It was the subject of intense lobbying by groups including the restaurant association, the small business and beverage group, and the chicken farmers’ lobby.

</blockquote>

The chicken farmers’ lobby could be a caption for an unfunny New Yorker cartoon, but in Mississippi it’s also apparently a powerful business group — though hardly the only one with skin in this game.

Mike Cashion, executive director the Mississippi Hospitality and Restaurant Association, says the bill is a direct reaction to Bloomberg-style government intervention in public health.

“If you look at how menus have changed, whether it be in fast food or family dining, you are seeing more and more healthy options,” Cashion says. “Not because of legislative mandates or regulatory mandates, but because of consumer demand. Our industry has always been one to respond to the marketplace.”

</blockquote>

Cashion is on a real free-market trip! But free markets and consumer demands always seem to go hand in hand with business profits, and Cashion’s loyalties are with the restaurants, not with the people who eat at them. The <a href="http://www.msra.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=104">Mississippi Hospitality and Restaurant Association’s website</a> proclaims that the “industry is represented by a team of government affairs experts that is dedicated to protecting you from harmful legislation while promoting legislation that will benefit the industry. We estimate that our Government Affairs victories have saved the average restaurant over $10,000 over the past 4 years.”

This isn’t a story about how Mississippians don’t want to know what they’re eating. It's yet another example of business buying government — the food business has proven to be pretty good at that over the years. And in that way, it’s hardly news at all.

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://grist.org/news/mississippi-poised-to-pass-anti-bloomberg-bill-banning-healthy-food-regs/">http://grist.org/news/mississippi-poised-to-pass-anti-bloomberg-bill-banning-healthy-food-regs/</a></div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Prop 188 tobacco CA</div>

<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1994-10-30/local/me-56498_1_secondhand-tobacco-industry-s-ploy-philip-morris">http://articles.latimes.com/1994-10-30/local/me-56498_1_secondhand-tobacco-industry-s-ploy-philip-morris</a> 1994

<h1 class="multi-line-title-1" style="text-align: left; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 25px; font-weight: normal;">Prop. 188 Is Tobacco Industry's Ploy</h1>

</div>

<div id="mod-article-byline" class="mod-latarticlesarticlebyline mod-articlebyline" style="text-align: left; padding: 0px; margin: 15px 0px 10px; border: 0px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">October 30, 1994</div>

On Nov. 8, Californians will decide an issue of critical importance to the health of each of us: Proposition 188. This is the so-called California Uniform Tobacco Control Act, sponsored by Philip Morris Inc. If you think Philip Morris and the tobacco industry are really concerned about controlling the use of tobacco and preventing cigarette-related illness and deaths in California, think again.

</div>

Their deceptively worded initiative seemingly offers protection to nonsmokers from exposure to secondhand smoke. In fact, it rolls back hard-won gains to eliminate smoking from restaurants, workplaces and other public places and would set back state indoor clean-air standards by more than a decade. It would repeal the recent enactment of AB13, signed by Gov. Pete Wilson to ban smoking in virtually all public places, as well as over 300 stronger local ordinances.

Former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop has stated that "Prop. 188 is hazardous to your health. Philip Morris . . . is spending millions of dollars to pass Prop. 188 to protect industry profits. It should be called the 'Tobacco Industry Protection Act.' "

Proposition 188 aims to bring smoking back--in workplaces and in restaurants--and keep it back. Cities and counties will be prohibited from enacting any tougher tobacco control laws, and the only possible redress would be through a two-thirds vote of the state Legislature. If passed, more than 1 million nonsmoking workers in California will be exposed to secondhand smoke.

The American Heart Assn., American Cancer Society, American Lung Assn., the California State PTA, American Medical Assn. and many other organizations are weighing in against Prop. 188.

Remember to vote no on 188, and urge your friends and family to do likewise.

NADINE WILCK

Chairman of the board

American Heart Assn., Orange County

</div>

</div>

<a href="http://globalexchange.org/communityrights/rbo/shasta">http://globalexchange.org/communityrights/rbo/shasta</a>

<h1 class="print-title" style=" text-align: left;">Mt. Shasta Water Rights Campaign</h1>

Read the report: Mt. Shasta Water Rights - Who Decides?

Click on the report cover to download.

<a href="http://www.globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/mtshastareport.pdf" target="_blank"> </a>[1]

In October 2008, residents of Mount Shasta learned that PG&E intended to begin a cloud seeding project in their southeastern watershed through an announcement in the Mount Shasta Herald. Mt. Shasta residents face two major threats to their local water supply: 1) PG&E’s practice of cloud seeding, where the energy giant launches a cannon of silver iodide into passing storm clouds, forcing the unnatural release of rain in one location, which it then channels for corporate use as hydroelectric power; and 2) water withdrawal from the local aquifer by corporate water bottlers. The community wanted to stop these unwanted practices, which pose serious environmental damage to their very pristine ecosystem at the base of Mt. Shasta and threaten resident's well-being.

<div style=" text-align: left;">Both local and county officials knew nothing about the cloud seeding efforts. Residents learned that officials were unaware of PG&E's plan because the State of California allows private corporations to modify weather using toxic chemicals without regulation, monitoring or permits. Since then, the Mt. Shasta community linked with Global Exchange and formed the <a href="http://www.yestolocalrights.org/">Mt. Shasta Community Rights Project</a> [2] and wrote an ordinance that bans cloud seeding and corporate water bottling. </div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Following a series of public presentations and strategy meetings with residents, Global Exchange’s recently held a three-day “campaign-school” with a core group 15 local organizers committed to leading a rights-based campaign. We helped them draft the “Mt. Shasta Community Water Rights and Self-Government Ordinance,” designed to assert and secure the right of the people of Mt. Shasta to natural water systems and cycles.  Specifically, the ordinance: </div>

<ul>

<li style=" text-align: left;">asserts the rights of residents to exercise self government; </li>

<li style=" text-align: left;">bans corporations from engaging in weather manipulation; </li>

<li style=" text-align: left;">establishes strict liability and burden of proof for chemical trespass; </li>

<li style=" text-align: left;">bans corporations from engaging in water? withdrawal for resale; </li>

<li style=" text-align: left;">strips corporate rights and protections that allow them to subordinate people and the environment to the will of a few; and</li>

<li style=" text-align: left;">recognizes and enforcing the rights of nature. </li>

</ul>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Proponents have been working long and hard to get this on the ballot having faced various barriers along the way. Read their story (see PDF David vs Goliath below) to see how the campaign took a turn, revealing the true challenges our communities face to make change.  Also see below to download sample campaign materials that we designed to assist Shasta and other communities as they work toward achieving local self control and rights for nature. </div>

<ul>

<li style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/mtshastareport.pdf">Mt. Shasta Water Rights Report</a> [3] (.pdf) </li>

<li style=" text-align: left;">"<a href="http://globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/Mt.%20Shasta-Tikkun.pdf">Shasta & Goliath: Bring Down Corporate Rule</a> [4]," by Allen Kanner. Tikkun, Winter 2011 (.pdf)</li>

<li style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/Mt%20Shasta%20Ordinance%20Myths%20and%20Facts.pdf">Mt. Shasta Ordinance Myths & Facts</a> [5] (.pdf)</li>

<li style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/Messaging_RBO.pdf">Messaging for Rights based organizing</a> [6] (.pdf)</li>

<li style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/FAQ%20for%20Shasta.pdf">FAQ for Shasta and your community</a> [7] (.pdf)</li>

<li style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://globalexchange.org/communityrights/rbo/samplesordinances">Sample “Bill of Rights” ordinances</a> [8]</li>

</ul>

Click <a href="http://readthedirt.org/2013/02/17/democracy-denied-in-small-town-usa/" target="_blank">here</a> [9] to read a Feb 17th update/article from Read The Dirt on the effort to pass a Community Water Rights and Self-Government Ordinance in Mt. Shasta. Hear how the citizens of this small town were, as our author states, “denied their right to vote on this admittedly controversial measure.” The Ordinance would have banned corporate cloud seeding and water extraction.

</div>

==

<h2 style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 0.3em; padding: 0px; border: none; z-index: 0; outline: none; width: auto; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.2em; letter-spacing: -0.03em;">Democracy Denied in Small Town, USA</h2>

<h5 style="text-align: left; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; z-index: 0; outline: none; width: auto; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.3em;">by: <a href="http://readthedirt.org/author/mt-shasta-community-rights-project" title="Posts by Mt. Shasta Community Rights Project, Molly Brown" style="font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; text-decoration: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: inherit; z-index: 0; display: inline; border: none;">Mt. Shasta Community Rights Project, Molly Brown</a> Posted on: February 17, 2013</h5>

Editor’s Note: Read the story of the inner workings of Mt. Shasta, California’s effort to pass a Community Water Rights and Self-Government Ordinance. Hear how the citizens of this small town were, as our author states, “denied their right to vote on this admittedly controversial measure.” The Ordinance would have banned corporate cloud seeding and water extraction.

People attending Democracy School decided to create a rights-based Ordinance in our small town of Mt. Shasta aimed at prohibiting not only cloud seeding, but also corporate water extraction for export and resale outside the city limits. The multinational corporation Nestle was at that time trying to set up a huge water-bottling plant in the nearby town of McCloud. The group also decided to include a prohibition against “chemical trespass” from nearby cloud seeding. In addition, the ordinance aimed to assert our community’s right to local self-governance as superior to rights of corporations within our community.

On September 10, Judge Dixon heard the arguments of the attorneys. The County Attorney argued for Setzer, claiming that it didn’t matter whether Setzer was the official elections clerk or not; either way we proponents had made procedural errors and therefore the measure should not be on the ballot. To view our eleven page long response <a href="http://readthedirt.org/PetitionersReplyBrief090810-Mt.%20Shasta.pdf" style="font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; text-decoration: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: inherit; z-index: 0; display: inline; border: none;">click here</a>. Judge Dixon more or less dismissed the concern about the language change during the hearing. However, when her ruling came out ten days later, she ruled against returning Measure A to the ballot, stating that Setzer was NOT the City Elections Clerk and therefore didn’t have the authority to put the measure back on the ballot. (She didn’t address the paradox of Setzer having the authority to remove it.) The ruling also claimed the City Council had not passed the proper resolution to place the measure on the ballot, in spite of the fact that City Council had done exactly that, using similar language to resolutions that placed two other measures on the ballot—both of which remained on the ballot without challenge.

<div style=" text-align: left;">March 5, 2013  </div>

This <a href="http://www.onearth.org/blog/town-board-to-residents-shut-up-about-fracking">story</a> [3] originally appeared at <a href="http://www.onearth.org/">OnEarth.org</a> [4].

During my 12-year career as a newspaper reporter, I spent thousands of hours sitting through city council meetings, zoning board hearings, property tax appeals, school board work sessions, and just about every other kind of attention-sapping municipal meeting you could possibly imagine. (It wasn’t all bad: I met my wife at one.) At these meetings, it wasn’t uncommon for the same topics to come up over and over again, frequently with the same people making the same points about the same issues that everyone in attendance has heard a million times before. (Think “<a href="mailto:http://www.nbc.com/parks-and-recreation/" target="_blank">Parks and Rec</a> [5]” without any laughs.) So I sympathize, perhaps more than I should, with elected officials and public servants who would like to find a way to make topics they’ve heard about and debated endlessly just … go ... away.

Still, I had never heard of a town that actually imposed a gag order on its own citizens, until the Natural Resources Defense Council (which publishes OnEarth) received complaints about a town board in Sanford, New York (population: 2,400), that told its residents they could no longer bring up concerns about fracking at town meetings.

NRDC and a local partner, Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy, <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ksinding/youre_silencing_us-protectin.html" target="blank">sued the Sanford town board</a> [6] last month, claiming that the ban on fracking discussions violates the First Amendment rights of the town’s residents, some of whom are NRDC members. In a complaint to the U.S. District Court, the organizations say the town violated the U.S. and New York State constitutions by restricting residents’ right to free speech during the public participation portion of town meetings, which remains open to all other topics -- just not fracking. (Below is <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0IVHa2IASE" target="blank">a video of the September 11 meeting</a> [7] at which the gag order was adopted.)

Sanford sits in what is called New York’s Southern Tier, on the Pennsylvania border. More importantly for this discussion, it’s in the heart of Marcellus Shale country, where a deep-rock formation contains large natural gas reserves that can only be reached through a controversial and disruptive process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. South of the border, Pennsylvania communities are being swarmed by natural gas drillers who are driving a boom in U.S. energy development -- along with concerns about air and water pollution, health impacts, community division, and declining property values. (For an account of how one Pennsylvania community is being affected, see “<a href="http://www.onearth.org/article/fracking-the-amish">Fracking the Amish</a> [8].”) North of the border, though, a moratorium prevents fracking while New York State regulators study whether it can be done safely, and what rules are needed to protect residents. [UPDATE: State Health Department Commissioner Nirav Shah said that <a href="http://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Health-Dept-Fracking-review-needs-more-time-4272342.php#ixzz2KiqmBxD6" target="_blank">a key health review on fracking</a> [9] is going to take more time, likely pushing back a decision that had been expected by the end of this month.]

Communities that stand to be affected by fracking have taken positions on both sides of the debate, with some expressing support for the economic benefits and others enacting rules to forbid natural gas drilling inside their borders. Sanford's town board has come down largely on the pro-fracking side, even leasing land to a natural gas company for drilling within the town and passing a resolution urging state lawmakers to allow fracking to proceed. A week before the gag order was imposed, Town Supervisor Dewey Decker signed a letter to Governor Cuomo asserting that a delay was "only empowering opponents” -- including, presumably, the opponents in his own community.

Naturally, those fracking opponents weren’t too happy about the board’s pro-drilling actions, and they were vocal about it during the board��s public comment sessions, leading to the gag order. Herbert Kline, an attorney who represents Sanford, <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hBWjkUEABp-Pu8Fb3sAUA9bgfiPA?docId=f3c091db1a6f4bf5b1b3a8d2f07b2b91" target="_blank">told the Associated Press,</a> [10] "People who were against fracking had, in the minds of the town board, monopolized discussion in the public participation portion of prior meetings to the extent that very little other business could be accomplished.”

You know what? Tough. Again speaking as someone who has spent thousands of hours in public meetings, that’s what happens when people have strong opinions about issues that matter to their lives, their families, and their community: they want to talk about them, and they want their elected decision makers to listen. And for people who live in the Marcellus Shale region, it’s hard to imagine an issue more vital to their health and homes than fracking. Mike Mustante, one of the Sanford residents prevented from speaking out, told NRDC that by gagging him, the town board "ended any chance that I might have to affect the future value of my home, or the quality of the air I breathe, or the water I drink.” That’s the kind of thing a guy won't shut up about.

<div style=" text-align: left;">See more stories tagged with:</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/fracking-0">fracking</a> [11]</div>

</div>

<div class="print-source_url" style="text-align: left;">Source URL: <a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/gag-order-town-board-decides-community-can-no-longer-discuss-fracking-town-meetings">http://www.alternet.org/environment/gag-order-town-board-decides-community-can-no-longer-discuss-fracking-town-meetings</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Links:</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[1] http://www.nrdc.org/onearth</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/scott-dodd</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[3] http://www.onearth.org/blog/town-board-to-residents-shut-up-about-fracking</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[4] http://www.onearth.org/</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[5] mailto:http://www.nbc.com/parks-and-recreation/</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[6] http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ksinding/youre_silencing_us_-_protectin.html</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[7] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0IVHa2IASE</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[8] http://www.onearth.org/article/fracking-the-amish</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[9] http://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Health-Dept-Fracking-review-needs-more-time-4272342.php#ixzz2KiqmBxD6</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[10] http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hBWjkUEABp-Pu8Fb3sAUA9bgfiPA?docId=f3c091db1a6f4bf5b1b3a8d2f07b2b91</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[11] http://www.alternet.org/tags/fracking-0</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">[12] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Communities across the country are facing the many problems associated with corporate control of agriculture.  Called the corporatization of agriculture, it means that fewer and fewer people (acting through corporations) are controlling more and more of our food production.  These are corporate directors deciding to grow genetically-modified food, deciding to use mass production for “efficiency,” deciding to use toxic urban sewage sludge as fertilizer, and deciding to use manufactured chemicals, herbicides, and antibiotics to grow our food.</div>

One of the symptoms of the corporate take-over of agriculture is the land application of sewage sludge on croplands.  Sewage sludge is the solid waste that's removed from the water that ends up at the sewage treatment plant from homes, factories, hospitals, and anywhere you can think of that has a sink, a shower, a garage floor drain, a toilet....in fact everything that can be flushed "away."

But it doesn't really go "away." It is collected at waste water treatment plants. It's removed from the water, so that the water can be returned to the aquifers, streams and rivers with a lot less poison and pollutants in it. But what is left behind, with most of the water removed, is sewage sludge.

The dangers of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sewage_sludge">sewage sludge</a> are innumerable.  It contains PCBs, pesticides, dioxins, heavy metals, bacteria, asbestos, petroleum products and industrial solvents, to name a few of the more than 60,000 contaminants.  Despite the contents, it is offered as free fertilizer to farmers, who spread it on cropland.

Illnesses and even deaths have been reported in association with the "land application" (dumping) of sludge in rural communities. There have been firings of EPA researchers who spoke out about about the health and environmental risks of land applying sewage sludge, and coercive state laws that forbade rural communities from banning dumping.

How, then, is it allowed to continue?

<div style=" text-align: left;">State and Corporate Legal Authority</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">While most of us were taught that the U.S. Constitution was written to protect the rights of human beings, communities regularly witness sludge industry corporations wielding the constitution to override community decision-making.  When residents try to prevent a corporation from spreading sewage sludge – or “sludging” – they are threatened with a lawsuit for violating the <a href="http://www.celdf.org/section.php?id=41">corporation’s “rights.”</a></div>

Worse, residents confronting corporate sludgers learn that their state government – with the help and at the behest of corporations – has legally authorized sludging to take place.  Thus when communities contact their state agency for help to stop sludging, they find that rather than helping them stop it, the agency is instead issuing permits to sludge.    People discover that they face not only corporate directors who wield the constitutional “rights” of corporations to prevent residents from protecting their communities, but that their own <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/A_%28Very%29_Brief_History_of_Dillons_Rule.pdf">state preempts</a> them from doing so as well.

What to do?

<div style=" text-align: left;">The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund has been at the forefront of this issue, helping residents, local groups, and municipal officials to ban the land application of sewage sludge and to create the communities they envision.  Through grassroots organizing, public education and outreach, our <a href="http://www.celdf.org/section.php?id=149">Democracy Schools</a>, research, community meetings, and the drafting of ordinances, we assist communities to learn about our system of corporate governance and what they can do to protect themselves and their community.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Over a decade ago, we began assisting communities threatened with sludging – working with them to draft ordinances that challenged state preemption and asserted the right of people to exercise local self-governance to protect their environment, health, safety, welfare, and quality of life. Since 2012, more than 80 communities in Pennsylvania have banned corporations from engaging in the land application of sewage sludge.  Our more recent ordinances enumerate the rights of communities and recognize the inalienable rights of natural communities and ecosystems to exist and flourish.  </div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">As our ordinances have evolved, today we have a <a href="http://celdf.org/downloads/Ordinance_Sustainable_Farming_Hawaii.pdf">model sustainable farming ordinance</a> available for communities.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Want to learn more?  Interested in what you can do to protect your community?  Contact us at <a href="mailto:info@celdf.org">info@celdf.org</a> or 717-498-0054. </div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Sludge disposal</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Until the late 1980s, it was common for municipalities to transport their sludge by barge to the nearest ocean and dump it 12 miles offshore. That changed in 1984 as increasing evidence showed that ocean dumping was harming marine ecosystems, and the EPA issued new regulations requiring sewage sludge to be dumped at least 106 miles offshore. Just four years later, in 1988, Congress passed the Ocean Dumping Ban Act to prohibit the practice altogether.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">The waste management industry, which hauls sludge away from sewage treatment plants, was forced to find another place to dump the waste. What it found was farmland. Today, the EPA estimates that half of the millions of tons of sewage sludge produced each year is applied to farmland.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">According to some estimates, sludge hauling is now an $11 billion a year industry. Sludge haulers — such as Houston-based Synagro Technologies, the largest of the companies involved and the owner of Waste Management, plus numerous subsidiaries — give farmers the sludge for free to apply to agricultural land where crops are grown.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Last year, the EPA reported findings from its Targeted National Sewage Sludge Survey, the fourth such survey since 1982. The latest survey sampled sewage sludge from some of the largest treatment plants in the country. Every sample studied contained flame retardants, pharmaceuticals, steroids, heavy metals, and other chemicals, but the report stated further that "inclusion of pollutants in the TNSSS does not reflect a determination that their presence in sewage sludge adversely affects human health or the environment."</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Public health advocates across the country are convinced there is a danger from exposure to sewage sludge spread on fields. Advocates have spent years lobbying Congress, the EPA, and state regulators to end the practice of land application.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">In the 2008 case of McElmurray v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, the federal district court in the Southern District of Georgia ordered the USDA to pay compensation to a rancher whose cows died after exposure to land-applied sewage sludge. The sludge was found to contain PCBs, arsenic, and heavy metals. Lawsuits continue to be filed as more people and livestock have fallen ill.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Saying "no"</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">The sludge itself</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Communities that try to stop sludging face a host of state and federal environmental regulatory laws — such as Pennsylvania's Solid Waste Management Act and the federal Clean Water Act — that legally authorize the land application of sewage sludge. They also find that the agencies administering these laws are actively promoting "biosolids recycling" on farmland — working with the waste haulers.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">The EPA has joined with the Water Environment Federation to form the National Biosolids Partnership, which promotes the land application of sewage sludge. The partnership's website includes biosolids "success stories."</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Packer Township adopted its ordinance in 2008 to prohibit sludging on farmland, knowing that the law might be challenged. Residents decided that a ban was their only choice. They had seen the impacts of sludging directly, as the ordinance describes:</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">"In 1994, eleven-year-old Tony Behun from Rush Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania, died from a staphylococcus infection shortly after being exposed to sewage sludge. The following year, seventeen-year-old Daniel Pennock from Reading, Pennsylvania, died from a staphylococcus infection shortly after being exposed to sewage sludge. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognizes staphylococcus as a potential pathogenic component of sewage sludge."</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">And: "In April 2002, the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which oversees state sewage sludge regulations, issued a report in which it concluded, 'EPA cannot assure the public that current land application [of sewage sludge] practices are protective of human health and the environment.'"</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">A key piece of the Packer ordinance is found in Section 8.12, which eliminates corporate constitutional "rights" and protections within the township. By taking this step, the township is, in effect, stripping away the waste haulers' court-conferred rights, including Fifth and 14th Amendment rights to due process and equal protection, as well as powers under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">In adopting those provisions, Packer joined a dozen other communities across the U.S. that have found it necessary to take on over 100 years of Supreme Court jurisprudence that confers the Bill of Rights and other protections onto corporations.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">The U.S. Supreme Court continues to expand and affirm corporate constitutional rights (this year's Citizens United decision is just one example of this trend). These communities do not expect the courts or government agencies to agree that corporate constitutional rights are illegal and illegitimate; instead, they are building a people's movement to drive such change upward to the state and federal levels. In the Packer Township lawsuit, the attorney general is arguing that the section of the township's ordinance that removes corporate constitutional rights "obviously is unconstitutional."</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Pennsylvania fights back ALEC?</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">In response to community ordinances banning sludging, as well as the dozen or so local ordinances prohibiting factory farming, the Pennsylvania state legislature adopted the Agriculture, Communities, and Rural Environment Act in 2005. The ACRE law, adopted at the urging of the agribusiness industry, authorizes the Pennsylvania attorney general to sue local townships to overturn these ordinances — and to sue at the request of agribusiness companies.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">This very step was taken in 2007, when Attorney General Thomas Corbett sued East Brunswick Township in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, at the behest of a sludging corporation. The aim was to overturn the township's anti-corporate sludging ordinance. A year after the suit was filed and before a decision could be issued in the case, the East Brunswick Board of Supervisors voted to rescind the ordinance and replace it with another that simply regulated sludging.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">The new ordinance restricted the hours when sludge could be spread and required farmers to notify the township before it was applied. The state attorney general sued East Brunswick a second time to overturn the new ordinance, arguing that the community was not authorized to regulate sludge more stringently than the state. Having settled the case with the state, the township is now allowed to prohibit sludge application on certain days such as major holidays.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://celdf.org/slinging-sludge---published-in-the-augustseptember-2010-issue-of-planning-copyright-2010-by-the-american-planning-association">http://celdf.org/slinging-sludge---published-in-the-augustseptember-2010-issue-of-planning-copyright-2010-by-the-american-planning-association</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Hartman:</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Townships Fight Back</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">In 2001 several townships in Pennsylvania passed ordinances forbidding corporations from owning or controlling farms in their communities. “They chose to go that route instead of the regulatory route,” said attorney Thomas Linzey of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF). “If we just got a regulation passed about, for example, odor from factory farms, then the entire debate from then on would be about odor. But what we want to challenge is the right for these huge corporate farming operations to exist in our communities in the first place.”<a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[3]">[3]</a></div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">In December 2001, Gene Mellott, the secretary for Thompson Township, Pennsylvania, told me that his township had adopted several such ordinances, including “an ordinance forbidding confined animal-feeding operations from being owned and operated by a corporation” and “one that deals with corporations who have a previous history of violations, denying them access to starting up an animal-feeding operation.”</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Mellott noted at the time of our interview that one farmer was actually going through the processes specified by the ordinance, cooperating with the township, prior to opening a new animal-feeding operation.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Other townships weren’t so lucky, though, Mellott said. “In one township the agribiz corporations threatened to sue the directors of the township, both as directors and personally. They didn’t have the personal funds to fight that, so they decided not to pass the ordinance.”<a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]">[4]</a></div>

scwamta

<div style=" text-align: left;">Why is corporate personhood a TOWN issue?</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Corporate personhood benefits only large corporations, disadvantaging the small and family-owned businesses that town governments most closely work with and support. </div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Only large national companies, chain stores, and global corporations invoke ‘corporate personhood.’ Small businesses rely more on personal relationships and the legitimate personhood rights of their human owners when working with town governments.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Campaign finance laws thrown out by Citizens United allowed both big and small donors to influence elections. Without limits, only large corporations, not small businesses, have the resources to flood local elections with out-of-district campaign funds.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Only large corporations, not small businesses, have the staff and resources to pursue expensive civil-rights litigation to overturn actions of local governments. Example: When Florida tried to impose differential permit fees on locally-owned and out-of-state businesses, a national corporation took the matter to the Supreme Court, claiming that the 14th Amendment (each person has a right to equal protection of the laws) forbade governments from favoring locally-owned corporations in any way. The difference in the amount of the permit fees? $25.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Town governments are the bulwark of local interests. The mission and interests of local governments—preserving local landmarks and identity, maintaining roads and sidewalks, supporting local businesses, enabling residents to participate in self-government, etc.—are the interests that large corporations are least likely to share.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Decision-makers within large corporations are not local people. They typically reside in other states—often even in other countries—and they know nothing about township interests. They often reap benefits from actions that harm the town’s residents.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Example: Large corporations have sued, or threatened to sue, local governments on ‘equal protection’ grounds when their residents seek local ordinances to control lighting, traffic, and land use to encourage small operations and discourage the “big-box” stores that destroy local character and put local merchants out of business.</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Example: In 2001, townships in Pennsylvania began adopting ordinances controlling odor emissions from confined animal-feeding operations. In a township with locally-owned operations, owners worked cooperatively with the local governments to comply with the ordinances. In a township with corporate-owned operations, big agribiz corporations threatened to sue the township directors, making 14th amendment claims in federal court, and the township declined to adopt any controls on the corporate animal-feeding operations. Not only did this hurt property values in those communities, it put the responsible locally-owned operations at a competitive disadvantage.</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Standing up for self-government and liberty has always been a local job. Americans have never relied—with good reason—on the national government to protect our right to self-government. From the invention of corporations in the 1500s throughout America’s history, corporations have (understandably) struggled to gain control of the governments that the people created to “provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.”</div>

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Periods when corporations increased their power over government have, so far, been followed by corrective periods when the people reassert control of the governments they created and rein in corporate excesses. These corrective periods have always been ushered in by the actions of grass roots people and the local governments closest to them. In addition, almost all constitutional amendments arose with local citizens; rarely has action to amend the constitution been initiated at the national level.</div>

<a href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3H4-Granting_the_Authority_of_Rural_Counties_to_Transition_to_Decentralized_Land_Use_Regulation_Exposed.pdf">http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3H4-Granting_the_Authority_of_Rural_Counties_to_Transition_to_Decentralized_Land_Use_Regulation_Exposed.pdf</a>

seems to allow evade regional, state or cty law?

--

ALEC

<h3 style=" text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 0.3em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-style: none; line-height: 19.200000762939453px; background-image: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Protecting Factory Farming from Regulation</h3>

One of the lesser publicized ventures of Koch Industries was its large-scale confined animal feed operations (CAFOs). At one point, Koch Beef Company was one of the largest cattle feeders in the U.S. When it sought to increase one of its already huge operations by 20,000 head of cattle, workers living a few hundred feet away expressed concerns for their health, and neighbors complained about an exponential increase in smell from Koch’s CAFO. But Koch persuaded friendly state regulators that the neighbors' concerns lacked “technical merit”-- although it ultimately divested the feed lots, while maintaining its Matador Cattle Company and grazing operations near Yellowstone National Park, along with other agricultural operations.

Is ALEC interested in protecting CAFOs? You bet. One of its bills, the<a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/af/3A8-Right_to_Farm_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" xmlns:data="data">“Right to Farm Act,”</a> would bar any lawsuits by neighbors claiming nuisance from any activities that are typical in farming, including industrial agriculture. If this bill passed, it would likely benefit ALEC's agribusinesses members.

</div><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]">

</a></div><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]">

</a></header><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]">

</a><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]"> </a>

<a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]"> Energy companies, corporate polluters, factory farms and their politician allies voted to change environmental rules by:</a>

<div style=" text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]">Limiting the ability of people to use their local governmental power to protect their towns and neighborhoods from pollution and other hazards, by:</a></div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4663-end-corporate-personhood#[4]"> </a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/f0/3A9-State_Pesticide_Preemption_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Forbidding local governments from limiting pesticide use</a>.</li>

</li><li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/5/59/3E4-Power_Plant_Siting_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Streamlining siting for nuclear and other power plants</a> by placing siting authority in a central agency.</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://alecexposed.org/w/images/8/8b/3A3-Biotechnology_State_Uniformity_Resolution_Exposed.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; background-image: url(); padding-right: 13px; background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat;">Prohibiting local efforts to oppose genetically modified (GMO) crops</a>.</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/2/28/3J0-Resolution_on_Packaging_and_the_Municipal_Solid_Waste_Stream_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Opposing local, state, and federal waste reduction and mandated recycling laws</a>, including regulations on packaging (such as Styrofoam restrictions), in favor of a "voluntary" approach to waste reduction.</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3H4-Granting_the_Authority_of_Rural_Counties_to_Transition_to_Decentralized_Land_Use_Regulation_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Eliminating land use and zoning regulations</a> designed to guide new development, and replacing them with private negotiations.</li>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Undermining environmental regulations through novel, aggressive legal theories that claim regulations limiting pollution, for example, constitute a "taking" of the right to pollute and thus require compensation under the Constitution, through innocuously named bills like:</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/47/3G9-The_Private_Property_Protection_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">the "Private Property Protection Act"</a> and the</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/b/b0/3G5-Regulatory_Costs_Fairness_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">the "Regulatory Costs Fairness Act"</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</li>

</li><li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;">

<div style=" text-align: left;">Expanding the rights of polluters, and limiting regulation of greenhouses gases and other industrial activities, by:</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/f3/3H18-Uniform_State_Environmental_Audit_Privilege_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Protecting polluting corporations from civil and criminal liability</a>by making a company’s internal audit or assessments of its pollution "privileged" and thus inadmissible in legal proceedings. (See also <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/d3/3H1-Environmental_Audit_Privilege_and_Qualified_Disclosure_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">this bill</a>).</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/9a/3J1-Resolution_to_Retain_State_Authority_over_Coal_Ash_as_Non-Hazardous_Waste_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Opposing uniform rules on hazardous coal combustion waste</a>, in favor of a race-to-the-bottom amongst state rules.</li>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Creating new burdens for legislators and agencies to pass environmental regulations by:</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/3/37/3H2-Environmental_Priorities_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Establishing a business-dominated panel to "assess" all environmental regulations</a>, using a framework established by a climate change-denier, the "Copenhagen Consensus."</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/f0/3C2-Conditioning_Regulation_of_Non-Pollutant_Emissions_on_Science_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Requiring states pass through multiple layers of process before passing environmental regulations</a>, including approval by two five-person panels emphasizing the theoretical "economic" effect of regulations.</li>

</ul>

</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/86/3K0-Groundwater_Protection_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Hindering state-level regulation of groundwater contaminants</a> by establishing EPA standards as a ceiling, rather than a floor, giving an agribusiness-dominated agency a regulatory veto, and adding other burdens.</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/9e/3E11-Resolution_to_Retain_State_Authority_over_Hydraulic_Fracturing_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Putting the regulation of "fracking" for methane gas in the hands of the states rather than establishing federal safety and environmental standards</a>. Fracking has been shown to spoil enormous quantities of drinkable water and contaminate nearby wells and watersheds.</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Reversing notions of preemption by <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/87/3H14-State_Regulatory_Responsibility_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">giving states authority to invalidate any federal law or directive</a> deemed to violate an expansive conception of state’s rights.</li>

</ul>

</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/aa/3G0-Eminent_Domain_Authority_for_Federal_Lands_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Giving states the power to appropriate national parks and other federal public land</a>, possibly to allow greater oil, gas, and coal extraction.</li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Additionally, the <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/6246/Limited_Immunity_for_Persons_Responding_to_Oil_Spills_Act.html" style=" text-decoration: none; background-image: url(); padding-right: 13px; background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat;">"Limited Immunity for Persons Responding to Oil Spills Act"</a> is available through the Heartland Institute website; it would free corporations from liability when they cause injury using toxic chemical dispersants to clean oil spills (as happened with the BP-funded cleanup after the Deepwater Horizon spill).</li>

</ul>

</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">For a full list of bills from this section, <a href="http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/Bills_Affecting_our_Water,Air,%26_Land" title="Bills Affecting our Water, Air, & Land" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">click here</a></div>

<h2 style="text-align: left; font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 19.2px; background-image: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">2010-2013 ALEC Bills</h2>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/5/5c/Disposal_and_Taxation_of_Public_Lands_Act.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Disposal and Taxation of Public Lands Act</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/1/1d/Electricity_Freedom_Act.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Electricity Freedom Act</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/9a/Intrastate_Coal_and_Use_Act.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Intrastate Coal and Use Act</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/1/1f/Pipeline_Replacement_and_Infrastructure_Modernization_and_Enhancement_Act.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Pipeline Replacement and Infrastructure Modernization and Enhancement Act</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/41/Resolution_Urging_Quick_Congressional_Action_on_the_Recommendations_of_The_Blue_Ribbon_Commission_on_America%C3%ADs_Nuclear_Future.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution Urging Quick Congressional Action on the Recommendations of The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/63/Resolution_Supporting_a_Reasonable_Compliance_Timeline_and_Economy-wide_impact_study_of_EPA%C3%ADs_Mercury_and_Air_ToxicsRule.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution Supporting a Reasonable Compliance Timeline and Economy-wide Impact Study of EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics Rule</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/ac/Resolution_Requesting_the_Obama_Administration_Confer_and_Consult_with_the_States_on_Management_of_Public_Lands_and_Energy_Resources.pdf#7" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution Requesting the Obama Administration Confer and Consult with the States on Management of Public Lands and Energy Resources</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/aa/Resolution_on_U.S._Conference_of_Mayors_Climate_Protection_Agreement_Accountability.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution on U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement Accountability</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/94/3A0-Agriculture_Bio-Security_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A0 Agriculture Bio-Security Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/5/55/3A1-ALEC_Resolution_on_Animal_Antibiotic_Use_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A1 ALEC Resolution on Animal Antibiotic Use Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/42/3A2-Biotechnology_Resolution_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A2 Biotechnology Resolution Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://alecexposed.org/w/images/8/8b/3A3-Biotechnology_State_Uniformity_Resolution_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A3 Biotechnology State Uniformity Resolution Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/4c/3A4-Commending_American_Forest_and_Paper_Product_Industries_and_the_Sustainable_Forest_Initiative_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A4 Commending American Forest and Paper Product Industries and the Sustainable Forest Initiative</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</ul>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/2/22/3A7-Resolution_on_Invasive_Noxious_Weeds_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A7 Resolution on Invasive Noxious Weeds Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/af/3A8-Right_to_Farm_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A8 Right to Farm Act Exposed</a>, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Right_to_Farm_Act" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaavkleqvr4xn3pgqkamqhduxfqtu7kttkpd5ra8ainfartq2irxfwt2qedafttj2fspioe1ecoleuowwjgzyab="AAAAVklEQVR4Xn3PgQkAMQhDUXfqTu7kTtkpd5RA8AInfArtQ2iRXFWT2QedAfttj2FsPIOE1eCOlEuoWWjgzYaB" ikegorxxhqb="IkeGOrxXhqB" ua9bfcm0lazuh="uA9Bfcm0lAZuh" yiead="YIeAD" caqsz4kcmuaaaaasuvork5cyii="); padding-right: 13px; background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;" xmlns:data="data">Right to Farm Act on SourceWatch</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/f0/3A9-State_Pesticide_Preemption_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A9 State Pesticide Preemption Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/63/3A11-Vegetative_Filter_Strips_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3A11 Vegetative Filter Strips Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6252.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" xmlns:data="data">Sagebrush Rebellion Act</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/3/37/3E0-Electricity_Transmission_Principles_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E0 Electricity Transmission Principles Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/7/77/3E1-ALEC_Energy_Principles_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E1 ALEC Energy Principles Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/ac/3E2-Energy_Efficiency_and_Savings_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E2 Energy Efficiency and Savings Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/0/09/3E3-Offshore_Energy_Resources_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E3 Offshore Energy Resources Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/5/59/3E4-Power_Plant_Siting_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E4 Power Plant Siting Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/ab/3E6-Resolution_on_Energy_Conservation_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E6 Resolution on Energy Conservation Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/1/14/3E7-Resolution_on_Mandatory_Electricity_Consumer_Disclosure_Information_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E7 Resolution on Mandatory Electricity Consumer Disclosure Information Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/fb/3E8-Resolution_on_Renewable_Energy_Resources_in_a_Competitive_Electricity_Marketplace_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E8 Resolution on Renewable Energy Resources in a Competitive Electricity Marketplace Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/2/2a/3E9-Resolution_Recognizing_the_Large_and_Growing_Need_for_Commercial_Nuclear_Energy_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E9 Resolution Recognizing the Large and Growing Need for Commercial Nuclear Energy Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/f7/3E10-Resolution_to_Repeal_Section_526_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E10 Resolution to Repeal Section 526 Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/9e/3E11-Resolution_to_Retain_State_Authority_over_Hydraulic_Fracturing_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E11 Resolution to Retain State Authority over Hydraulic Fracturing Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.eenews.net/assets/2012/05/01/document_ew_01.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">The Disclosure of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Composition Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/c/c6/3E12-Urge_Pres_and_Cong_to_Act_Expeditiously_in_Procuring_a_Site_or_Sites_for_the_Storage_of_High-Level_Radioactive_Waste_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E12 Urge Pres and Cong to Act Expeditiously in Procuring a Site or Sites for the Storage of High-Level Radioactive Waste Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3E13-Urging_Congress_to_End_the_Outer_Continental_Shelf_Moratorium_on_Oil_and_Natural_Gas_Exploration_and_Production_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3E13 Urging Congress to End the Outer Continental Shelf Moratorium on Oil and Natural Gas Exploration and Production Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.midwestenergynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Electricity-Freedom-Act-New.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Electricity Freedom Act</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6359.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Concurrent Resolution on Energy Taxation in a Competitive Electricity Marketplace</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6218.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Electric Industry Restructuring Act</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6420.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution for Date-Certain in Federal Electric Industry Restructuring Legislation</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6454.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution of Full Unbundling and Standards of Conduct for Electric Industry Restructuring</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6350.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution on Alternative Fuels</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6446.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution on Limited Applicability of Securitization in Electric Industry Restructuring</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6244.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Utility Construction Review Act</a></li>

</ul>

New ALEC Bills

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/1/11/ALEC_EE%2BAtf-Phoenix-Dec2011.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Disposal and Taxation of Public Lands Act</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/5/50/3B0-ALEC_Resolution_in_Opposition_to_EPA_Regulation_of_Greenhouse_Gases_from_Mobile_Sources_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3B0 ALEC Resolution in Opposition to EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Sources Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/f/fc/3B2-IN_OPPOSITION_TO_EPA_PLAN_TO_REGULATE_GREENHOUSE_GASES_UNDER_THE_CLEAN_AIR_ACT_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3B2 In Opposition to EPA Plan to Regulate Greenhouse Gases Under the Clean Air Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/7/71/3B6-Resolution_to_Support_the_Current_National_Ambient_Air_Quality_Standard-NAAQS-for_Particulate_Matter-PM_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3B6 Resolution to Support the Current National Ambient Air Quality Standard - NAAQS - for Particulate Matter - PM Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/0/0b/3B7-State_Implementation_Plan_Requirements_for_Ozone_and_Particulate_Matter_Attainment_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3B7 State Implementation Plan Requirements for Ozone and Particulate Matter Attainment Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/49/3C0-ALEC_State_Withdrawal_from_Regional_Climate_Initiatives_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3C0 ALEC </a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/49/3C0-ALEC_State_Withdrawal_from_Regional_Climate_Initiatives_Exposed.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;">State Withdrawal from Regional Climate Initiatives</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/4/49/3C0-ALEC_State_Withdrawal_from_Regional_Climate_Initiatives_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data"> Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/d4/3C1-Climate_Accountability_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3C1 Climate Accountability Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/0/01/3D0-Environmental_Corrupt_Organizations-Preventative_Legislation_and_Neutralization_%28ECO-PLAN%29_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3D0 Environmental Corrupt Organizations -Preventative Legislation and Neutralization (ECO-PLAN) Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/e/e6/3D1-The_Animal_and_Ecological_Terrorism_Act%28AETA%29_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3D1 The</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/e/e6/3D1-The_Animal_and_Ecological_Terrorism_Act%28AETA%29_Exposed.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;"> Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act (AETA)</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/e/e6/3D1-The_Animal_and_Ecological_Terrorism_Act_%28AETA%29_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data"> Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</ul>

</ul>

</div>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/8e/3G1-Ombudsman_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3G1 Ombudsman Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/b/b0/3G3-Property_Owners_Disclosure_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3G3 Property Owners Disclosure Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/8f/3G4-Protecting_Property_Rights_to_Facilitate_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3G4 Protecting </a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/8f/3G4-Protecting_Property_Rights_to_Facilitate_Exposed.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;">Property Rights</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/8f/3G4-Protecting_Property_Rights_to_Facilitate_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data"> to Facilitate Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/b/b0/3G5-Regulatory_Costs_Fairness_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3G5 Regulatory Costs Fairness Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</ul>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/6d/3H0-Economic_Impact_Statement_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H0 Economic Impact Statement Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/3/37/3H2-Environmental_Priorities_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H2 Environmental Priorities Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3H4-Granting_the_Authority_of_Rural_Counties_to_Transition_to_Decentralized_Land_Use_Regulation_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H4 Granting the Authority of Rural Counties to Transition to Decentralized Land Use Regulation Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/2/2b/3H5-Opportunity_to_Correct_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H5 Opportunity to Correct Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/8/82/3H6-Performance_Based_Permitting_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H6 Performance Based Permitting Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/1/13/3H7-Regulatory_Costs_Fairness_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H7 Regulatory Costs Fairness Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/3/3c/3H8-Resolution_in_Opposition_to_S1602_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H8 Resolution in Opposition to S1602 Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/0/06/3H10-Resolution_on_Local_Jursidiction_Consent_of_National_Monument_Designation_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H10 Resolution on Local Jursidiction Consent of National Monument Designation Exposed</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/9c/3H11-Resolution_to_Oppose_the_Conservation_and_Reinvestment_Act-CARA_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H11 Resolution to Oppose the Conservation and Reinvestment Act - CARA Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/60/3H13-State_Data_Quality_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H13 </a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/60/3H13-State_Data_Quality_Act_Exposed.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;">State Data Quality Act </a><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/60/3H13-State_Data_Quality_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</ul>

</div>

</ul>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/6/60/3H19-Verifiable_Science_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H19 Verifiable Science Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/c/cb/3H20-Wildlife_Information_Disclosure_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3H20 Wildlife Information Disclosure Act Exposed</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/2/25/3I0-brownfields_redevelopment_act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3I0 Brownfields Redevelopment Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/9/9a/3J1-Resolution_to_Retain_State_Authority_over_Coal_Ash_as_Non-Hazardous_Waste_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3J1 Resolution to Retain State Authority over Coal Ash as Non-Hazardous Waste Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://alecexposed.org/w/images/7/78/3J2-Waste_Tire_Abatement_Act_Exposed.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">3J2 Waste Tire Abatement Act Exposed</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6214.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;">Endangered Species Resolution</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/8156.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Environmental Justice Principles</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6493.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Resolution</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/8157.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Interstate Ozone Transport Oversight Act</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6251.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Interstate Research Commission on Climatic Change Act</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6246.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Limited Immunity for Persons Responding to Oil Spills Act</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/8247.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Local Jurisdiction Consent for National Monument Designation</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/8269.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Model State Resolution: Environmental Justice</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6247.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Pollution Prevention Act</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/7345.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution on Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS Revisions</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/8707.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution Opposing CAFÉ Standards Increase</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6527.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution to Freeze CAFÉ Standards</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6242.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Resolution to Oppose Unfunded Mandates on the States Etc.</a></li>

<li style=" text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6252.pdf" style=" text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat;">Sagebrush Rebellion Act</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6243.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Used Oil Collection Act</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/6254.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</div>

</div>

14TH AMENDMENT

synagro sludge tip fee

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/porter_township_ordinance/

In U.S. First, Local Government Refuses to Recognize Corporate Claims to Civil Rights

News from the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund

December 13, 2002

The elected municipal officials of Porter Township, Clarion County – a municipality of 1,500 residents an hour north of Pittsburgh in Northwestern Pennsylvania – became the first local government in the United States to eliminate corporate claims to civil and constitutional privileges. The Township adopted a binding law declaring that corporations operating in the Township may not wield legal privileges – historically used by corporations to override democratic decisionmaking – to stop the Township from passing laws which protect residents from toxic sewage sludge.

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-personhood/

</div>

</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>