The main people I would need to lobby to are my State officials. Specifically my House Representative: Representative Rosita Youngblood, my Senator, Leanne Washington and Governor Corbett. Each of these people have different views and interests so I'd have to proceed differently with each.
Rosita Youngblood was born in Philadelphia and elected as representative to the 198th District in 1994. She is a chairwoman in the house Gaming Oversight Committee and introduces issue-specific legislation. While she is mostly interested in legislation concerning domestic violence, welfare, health services, personal insurance and property tax provisions, she has voted yes to bills like SB 1155, HB 1200 and other clean energy bills. I have no doubt she would help me lobby against fracking. However, if I needed an "in" with her, I would talk to her about experiences she may have had in Philadelphia and how mine are similar or different.
Senator Leanne Washington has the most interesting biography of any of my representatives. She was a teen mom, a high school dropout, and a victim of domestic violence. She served in the House of Representatives for 12 years before becoming the Senator to the 4th district. She, like Youngblood, is primarily interested in enhancing community; she's interested in assistance for domestic violence, and social security insurance for disabled foster children. I think she would also be a good candidate to talk to about my lobbing topic. She co-sponsored SB 596, a bill creating a fund for citizens with contaminated well water caused by fracking.
The last, and most challenging of my representatives would be Governor Tom Corbett. He was elected to office in 2011. His top priorities while in office are to reduce the government budget, improving the economy and, in that same vein, jobs. I say he is the most challenging because he has been a big advocator of fracking and it's abundance of jobs. There was a bit of unrest because he was sponsored during his election by some Gas Companies. However, he has recently made an Act that would give counties in PA the right to make fees on fracking. An "in" I have with Corbett is that he went to college in Annville, which is where my grandparents live. He, also, worked in a highschool for some time so I could talk with him about how unique SLA is.
These are my three representatives that could help me with my lobbying project. I am generally confident that I could get good results from speaking to them about my topic. Which, is very helpful to know.
My representatives in Senate are Bob Casey and Pat Toomey.
Bob Casey, on his website, states that "as a Senator from Pennsylvania, I am committed to protecting the environment, preserving our natural treasures, and safeguarding the health of our families," and states that energy and the environment are among his priorities. He says that he is strongly against fracking, and has cosponsored one bill that would "close big oil tax loopholes". However, based on the list of legislation he has sponsored and cosponsored, his priorities seem to lie much more with veterans and education. He has four daughters, all of whom are around my age, and he plays basketball – so I would definitely be able to start a conversation with him.
Pat Toomey, on the other hand, will certainly not want the bill to be passed. One of his slogans is "More Jobs, Less Government" (see image below). Because of this, he will certainly not want more restrictions on companies that could be producing more and hiring more. He even introduced the Employment Protection Act of 2011, which would make the EPA "consider the impact on employment levels and economic activity" before any regulatory action. The Clean Chemicals Act is certainly in conflict with this bill. I looked for interests he and I might share, and found nothing. I am uncertain how I will be able to argue for this bill against someone who so clearly is opposed to anything of the kind.
If the bill gets through Senate, it will go to the House of Representatives. There, my representative if Chaka Fattah (see district map below). Looking through his legislative record, it is clear that his priority lies with education – from early childhood care to college funding. Howeve, he also sponsored the Clean Energy Act of 2010, which would have supported research into nuclear energy and other forms of renewable power. Based on this, I think he is highly likely to support the Clean Chemicals Act of 2011. Because of his interest in education, especially public education, I would definitely try to start a conversation by talking to him about my school.
For the post part, my representatives and the people on the bill's committee look like they'll support it. However, the opponents of the bill look quite immovable: Toomey, with whom I have very little in common, and the various Senators who are strongly opposed to the bill and do not have any reason to listen to some girl from Pennsylvania.
(from Toomey's campaign website)
Facts
of the Case: A citizen named
Albert Florence from the state of New Jersey was arrested on a bench warrant from
Essex County. Florence was charged from the arrested for non-indictable offense
and not capable to pay a fine. However, Florence argued for his rights and
protested the validity of the warrant due to the fact that he had paid the
fine. However, after his arrested and detention, the charge was, in fact
already been dismissed.
During the
arrest, Florence was stripped and search as subjected to a visual body cavity
search during his arrival at the Burlington County Jail. From the time of his
arrest he was being consume to visual body cavity search and after six days
upon his transfer from Burlington County to Essex Country Correctional Facility.
But soon after, the charge against him was dismissed and Florence was released.
However,
Florence decided to bring a civil rights lawsuit to the United State District
Court and to the District of New Jersey for claiming the right to his privacy
and the rights of all persons in the class of alleged minor offenders of
consuming in the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Also the Constitution were violated the
Fourth Amendment by strip and search a visual body cavity searches for a minor arrest.
This District Court agreed to Florence request and his claim to the charge.
Summary of the Arguments before the SCOTUS: The Court pointed out the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled in 1979, which stated “Inmates do not have the right of privacy in
prison that is guaranteed to ordinary citizens.” This is to protect the process
from unreasonable violations to any citizen’s privacy. The Court decided to
applied one of the cased called “Bell v. Wolfish,” which were also involved
visual body cavity searches for being arrestees including charged with a minor
offense and was striped and search.
The Court
decided to apply the rule of the Third Circuit panel that was persuaded by the
recent Eleventh and Ninth Circuit that ruled balancing the jails’ security
concerns. These circuits are –
(1)
The detection of smuggling weapons, contraband and drugs into the facility.
(2) The identification of gang
members by observation of their tattoos.
(3)
The prevention of disease, particularly MRSA, against the privacy interest of
the arrestees, a blanket policy of strip searching and subjecting all arrestees
to visual body cavity searches, irrespective of any particularized suspicion,
does not contravene the Fourth Amendment.
The pending legislation dealing with The Electoral College is the:
H.J.Res.36 - Proposing an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States to abolish the Electoral College and provide
for the direct election of the President and Vice President by the popular vote
of all citizens of the United States regardless of place of residence.
I believe this can really help my lobbying topic because with this and the graphs and explanations that let people know exactly how their votes are being used and counted if counted at all will really make people stop and think twice about whether or not they agree with the electoral college.
Now days everyone is concerned Fracking, Is it good for us? Our kids? the environment? Fracking is good and bad in different ways. In a way it can help our economy because it can provide jobs to the society. Not only it can provide jobs but it also can but it can make this nation an independent nation and have its own resource. Even though there are good sides to tracking, there are also bad sides. Fracking can make own water, which we use on the daily basis contaimnated. According to scientist, they show that fracking can lead to gas coming through the pipes which waters comes out from at our homes. Fracking is the procedure of creating fractures in rocks and rock formations by injecting fluid into cracks to force them further open. Basically what they're doing in Pennsylvania is that companies such as the gas companies drill water, sand and chemicals deep underground at high pressure. This opens cracks that allows natural gas to flow into the wells. Some homeowners in the drilling areas says that tracking has polluted their water. According to scientist, the homeowners can be right. Natural gas or methane is flammable and potentially explosive. Having such dangerous chemicals coming through our pipes to our homes can cause many problems. Problems from drinking water to taking a shower or cooking food. Fracking has its benefits and consequences.
