Tell California legislators to pass the net neutrality bills SB 822 and SB 460

California has the most comprehensive state-level net neutrality bills in the country.(1) Senate Bill 822 (Wiener) and Senate Bill 460 (de Leon) would restore all of the net neutrality protections that were stripped by the FCC last year.

But Big Telecom isn’t going down without a fight. They’re doing everything in their power to block passage of SB 822 and SB 460, or at least water down the bills.

States are quickly moving to restore net neutrality protections and aren’t being stopped by the FCC, which doesn’t have authority over state law.(2)  California is home to some of the world’s largest internet companies and can set an example for the nation -- including your home state. Will you join us and our partners in demanding that California legislators uphold a fair and open internet for all?

Tell California legislators to pass the net neutrality bills SB 822 and SB 460.

With the net neutrality repeal in effect, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T are allowed to charge us to access websites and services. But SB 822 and SB 460 would restore in California the net neutrality protections gutted by the FCC’s disastrous decision. If passed, ISPs would be prohibited from blocking content, slowing certain sites or services, or charging new fees for users and companies to reach audiences online.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has claimed that with the new federal net neutrality policy, states cannot circumvent federal law and make their own. However, there isn’t even consensus among legal experts as to if that statement is true with the FCC’s limited power.(3) Washington state just passed their own net neutrality bill, and many other states are moving to do the same. We need to keep up the momentum.

Eighty-three percent of Americans want a free and open Internet.(4) SB 822 and SB 460 would fill this gap for Californians after the FCC stripped consumers of their rights. But Big Telecom lobbyists are using all their resources in states across the country to block legislation that would restore protections for us. Will you help us fight back and win net neutrality in California -- setting an example for even more states to follow?

Sign the letter of support to demand California legislators pass the net neutrality bills.

Yours in the fight,

Brenna, along with Annie, Caitlin, Eddie, Emma, Lindsay, Mai, Mary, Molly, Raquel, Rebecca, Scottie, and Tim (the Courage team)

Footnotes:
1. https://www.wired.com/story/california-net-neutrality-bill-would-go-beyond-original-protections/
2. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/in-blow-to-muni-broadband-fcc-loses-bid-to-overturn-state-laws/
3. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/02/why-ajit-pai-might-fail-in-quest-to-block-state-net-neutrality-laws/
4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/12/this-poll-gave-americans-a-detailed-case-for-and-against-the-fccs-net-neutrality-plan-the-reaction-among-republicans-was-striking/

Tell the California Water Board to stop Nestlé’s illegal water grab during drought

Nestlé is illegally sucking millions of gallons of water out of the San Bernardino National Forest -- while wildfires are burning out of control across California.

One of California’s wildfires has just been declared the 'largest in state's history', with thousands of firefighters struggling to bring an area bigger than New York state under control. The drought-stricken state has had the worst start to the fire season in a decade. Yet Nestlé continues to draws millions of gallons of water illegally from the San Bernardino National Forest -- and sells it for millions in profits

The California Water Board can stop it though. Tell it to enforce its directive to stop Nestlé’s illegal water grab. 

The California Water Board has directed Nestlé to limit its water-taking to what it is legally permitted to draw. Instead, Nestlé is taking almost 10 times that amount -- often over 60 million gallons a year.

The Water Board has the power to enforce its directive and stop Nestlé’s illegal water grab. And it opposes Nestlé just as much as we do. A huge wave of support for the Water Board right now could be what it needs to finally stop Nestlé from stealing California’s precious water.

Tell the California Water Board to stop Nestlé’s illegal water grab in California.

For all the water Nestlé takes from the San Bernardino National Forest it pays a laughable $624 a year. Then it sells the water for millions in profit -- while sucking the state dry.

This water is critical for Strawberry Creek -- home to 71 species of threatened wildlife -- which is running ever drier as Nestlé steals the water for its own greedy profiteering.

California’s wildfires are getting worse every year and are compounded by the dry conditions killing off large amounts of vegetation. California’s water is a precious resource that helps to mitigate the effects of drought and wildfire and must be protected not stolen by multi-billion dollar corporation.

SumOfUs has been fighting Nestlé - and winning. Earlier this year, when Nestlé sued a small township in Michigan, thousands of SumOfUs members like you chipped in and raised $50,000 USD so the township could fight for its water. Together we have the power to take on greedy corporations like Nestlé and protect our water for future generations.

SIGN THE PETITION

- SumOfUs


More information:

California Water Board Directs Nestlé to Immediately Cease Unauthorized Use of California’s Water, Story of Stuff, January 2018
California fire explodes in size, is now largest in state history, CNN, 07 August 2018

Tell the RSPO: sanction Nestlé and Pepsi's reckless palm oil business partner Indofood

We have just a few weeks left to persuade the palm oil industry to blacklist Nestlé’s reckless business partner, Indofood. The Indonesian food giant is responsible for illegal rainforest destruction and worker abuse. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil is making a decision in the coming weeks and we need your help to pressure it to deliver a strong verdict against Indofood.

SIGN THE PETITION

Nestlé's palm oil business partner Indofood is the worst of the worst when it comes to producing palm oil. The Indonesian giant has gotten away with rainforest destruction and worker abuse for too long.

This impunity could end soon! The palm oil industry’s main certification body, the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) could finally kick the rogue company off its certification scheme. The RSPO complaints panel meets next week, so we need to act fast. This decision will be a crucial step in getting Nestlé to finally cut deforestation and abuse out of its supply chain.

Together, we can expose the RSPO’s greenwashing and put its reputation at risk so it doesn’t stick to business as usual and overlook Indofood’s gross violations.

Sign the petition to demand the RSPO suspends Nestlé’s business partner Indofood.

Owned by Indonesia’s richest man, Indofood has been exposed in multiple investigations for exploiting workers, paying poverty wages (and female workers even less), dangerous working conditions, and intimidating communities off their land for illegal deforestation. It also ignores the RSPO’s guidelines on protecting precious orangutan habitat and is guilty of logging on carbon-rich peat land, intensifying climate chaos.

Nestlé is in on this game. The snack food giant co-brands products in the South Asian market, and profits from a lucrative Joint Venture Partnership with Indofood -- cheating on its palm oil commitments.

Getting the industry’s main certification scheme to suspend Indofood could force Nestlé to take strong action against Indofood, or risk public backlash. A suspension would give us even more evidence to call for Nestlé to permanently cut ties with Indofood.

There’s very little time before Nestlé’s business partner gets its verdict.

Sign the petition to pressure the RSPO into suspending Indofood -- NOW.

Together, we’ve forced some of the palm oil industry’s biggest players to change their destructive ways before. Last year a huge SumOfUs petition shone light on another one of Nestlé’s dodgy palm oil partners -- REPSA in Guatemala. The exposure and media fall-out forced Nestlé to cut ties with the Guatemalan palm oil offender!

The RSPO often fails to enforce its own standards, but if we pile on the pressure it could be forced to sanction Indofood. Recently, the RSPO froze Nestlé’s membership for several weeks when it failed to comply with its rules.

The suspension was a blow to Nestlé’s public image, and zoos and retailers around the world refused to stock its products for the period. That’s why we want to send a strong message to the industry by getting Indofood suspended for good.

Sign the petition to demand the RSPO suspends Nestlé’s business partner Indofood.

- SumOfUs


More information:

The Human Cost of Palm Oil. 
Indonesia: PepsiCo linked to worker exploitation in the palm oil sector through joint venture partner Indofood, Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, 21 June 2016
Indonesian billionaire using ‘shadow companies’ to clear forest for palm oil, says report, Eco Business, 12 April 2018
RSPO Investigating Reports of Ongoing Labor Abuse at Indofood Plantations, Jakarta Globe. 11 December 2017

Tell the Food and Drug Administration: Take action against contaminants in baby food

A new Consumer Reports analysis released just today found worrisome levels of contaminants in baby and toddler food products. CR looked at baby cereals; packaged fruits and vegetables; packaged entrees; snacks, such as puffs, rice rusks, cookies; and other foods often fed to infants and toddlers. A majority of these foods had concerning levels of cadmium, lead, and/or inorganic arsenic, elements that are commonly known as “heavy metals.”

Consumer Reports are now calling on the Food and Drug Administration to quickly impose new limits to ensure our babies and toddlers are safe. Sign our petition now to call on the FDA to take the following action:

• Establish aggressive targets: Set a goal of having no measurable amounts of cadmium, inorganic arsenic, or lead in baby and children’s food.
• Create and enforce benchmarks: To reach its goals in baby and children’s food, FDA should insist that manufacturers follow recognized best practices and set incremental targets for industry to meet along the way.  
• Finalize existing proposed guidelines: FDA should limit inorganic arsenic in apple juice to 10 ppb, and limit inorganic arsenic in infant rice cereal to 100 ppb. Also, it should revise existing guidance for lead in fruit juice to reduce the limit from 50 to 5 ppb, the standard for bottled water.

These heavy metals raise the risk of cancer, type 2 diabetes, and other serious health problems.  Children, because of their developing brains and nervous systems, are even more susceptible to the serious risks. In fact, research suggests that exposure to even small amounts of heavy metals at an early age is linked to cognitive and behavioral problems, such as lower IQs and ADHD.

These exposures can have lasting effects. Federal safety watchdogs should take steps quickly to address these problems.

Tell the FDA to act now without delay to keep babies and children safe.

After you’re done signing the petition, please forward this call to action to your friends and family so we can get even more people speaking out.

- Meg Bohne, Consumer Reports

More Information:

Consumer Reports finds 'concerning' levels of heavy metals in some baby foods

Tell the Council for Environmental Quality : Safeguard NEPA environmental reviews

For nearly 50 years, the United States has benefited from an empowering legal tool that allows communities to protect themselves and their environment from dangerous, rushed and poorly planned federal projects. Now the Trump administration and congressional Republicans are working to weaken that law and silence local voices.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ensures that we all have a voice when polluter interests want to build a toxic waste incinerator in our neighborhood or a dangerous pipeline next to our children’s school. The plan to gut this vital tool—the nation’s oldest environmental law—is nothing short of a public gag order. NEPA also allows communities to offer local expertise to make good projects safer and more efficient.

The federal government funds and carries out projects in communities across the country. Many of these projects cater to wealthy corporations that seek to profit at the expense of the health and safety of their workers and the people living near the project sites. Many of these projects have an outsized impact on working-class communities and communities of color, who often face disenfranchisement in our political system.

The Trump administration’s decision to start the process of administratively rolling back NEPA environmental reviews is a thinly veiled attempt to rubberstamp permits for corporate polluters. Don’t let that happen—take action today.

- Earth Justice

Click on this link to send the following message to the Council of Environmental Quality.  

(Personalize it for more impact.) 

Dear Council on Environmental Quality,

I urge you to protect the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by keeping its implementing regulations strong. Changes to NEPA’s implementing regulations should focus on strengthening the application of the law and investing more in public involvement without undermining the current protections it offers. 

Before contemplating any changes, the CEQ must go through a robust process that relies on public input, requiring numerous public hearings across the country, and must detail its reasons for any proposed changes.

NEPA ensures that our communities have a say in major federal decisions that affect our health and safety. It is often the only way for people to voice their concerns about the consequences that federal projects will have for their communities, and to demonstrate how local expertise can improve them. Our communities are safer and healthier because of a strong NEPA.

NEPA ensures that federal agencies “look before they leap” as they fund and permit major projects that impact so many communities across the country. Weakening NEPA puts our communities at risk and makes government less efficient by undermining a process that often uncovers major problems in project design and builds consensus as these problems are addressed.

An attack on NEPA is an attack on our ability to keep our communities safe and healthy. You have the opportunity to protect us from hasty decision making that would put our communities at great risk. Make sure we have a voice—protect NEPA!

Tell the EPA: Withdraw the "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science" proposal that restricts the use of the best available science

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a rule that would restrict the agency's ability to rely on the best available science to ensure that we have clean air and clean water. This is nothing more than an attempt to undermine the EPA's mission to protect public health and the environment. Our air, water, and health all rely on the EPA using the best available science in decision making.

Please, send a public comment to the EPA.

Submit your comment by August 16 at 11:59 p.m.

Feel free to use the sample letter below as a starting place for your public comment.  It's best to share your personal story about how restrictions on science would harm your health and the environment. The more people who file comments, the less the EPA can ignore the weight of the evidence.

Sample Letter:

To: Andrew Wheeler, acting administrator, Environmental Protection Agency

I am writing to express my objection to and concern about the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science" proposal (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-2018-0259). I believe that science plays a pivotal role in ensuring our health and safety, preserving our environment, and informing evidence-based policy. This new proposal would undermine the EPA's mission of preserving public health and the environment.

For the EPA to utilize the best available science to shape public health and environmental safeguards, the agency needs to have the ability to use the best research and information. While this proposed rule promises "transparency," it reduces confidentiality and privacy protections by requiring the raw data from these studies to be made public. Consequently, the best available scientific studies in numerous public health fields, where patient privacy prohibits sharing the raw data, would be sidelined. This arbitrary rejection of data from research on air quality, public health, drinking water, hazardous waste, and so many other fields would inhibit the EPA's ability to implement science-based protections.

When policies play a role in our health, safety, and environment, the EPA needs to use the best available evidence and research when finalizing safeguards. This ill-advised proposal would significantly limit the EPA's ability to make the informed policy decisions that the agency is required to under landmark public health and environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act.

I urge you to reconsider this proposed rule and withdraw it immediately.

---

Go to the public comment page to submit your individual comment now.

Be sure to submit your comment by August 16 at 11:59 p.m., and check your email for a receipt confirmation.

The Union of Concerned Scientists put together a few resources to assist you in writing your comment:
• Check out our helpful guide for writing a public comment.
• Watch our Public Comments 101 webinar on making effective public comments to the EPA.

More information on the proposal:

Scott Pruitt’s Crusade Against “Secret Science” Could Be Disastrous for Public Health - The New Yorker

Response to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science” proposed rule

Tell Secretary Zinke: Honor Tribal sovereignty, stop the trophy hunts!

The decision to remove Endangered Species protections from Greater Yellowstone grizzlies was clearly a bad one -- based on bad science, and shortsightedness about the continued challenges the bears face.

Hundreds of thousands of emails and phone calls from scientists, wildlife photographers, conservationists and wildlife lovers have been ignored. Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, three states notoriously hostile to carnivores, now control their future -- Wyoming and Idaho have trophy hunts scheduled to start on September 1.

And perhaps worst of all, the Department of Interior has never honored Tribal Nations’ call for consultation on management of the Greater Yellowstone grizzly -- a process required by federal law.

Sec. Zinke is certainly aware of this responsibility. He even committed, in Congressional testimony, to consult with Tribes before the delisting, citing a moral and legal responsibility to do so -- only to delist the bears literally hours later.

Demand respect for Tribal sovereignty and wildlife! Tell Zinke: Reinstate grizzly protections, stop the trophy hunt and consult with Tribes now!

- Sierra Club