Michigan continues to give away its biggest natural resource away for free

Here’s a pretty simple question? Who does the ground water in Michigan belong to, as well as the water of the Great Lakes and our numerous lakes, rivers and streams?

It seems to me it belong to the people, so why are bottled water companies like for Nestle Waters North America Inc. pulling it out of the ground for free? I guarantee this, Alaska doesn’t give its oil away for free, and every Alaska resident gets an annual check. Try this, go to the local 7-11 or party store and try buying a bottle of water for under $1. You simply can’t do it.

Bottled water is the single largest growth area among all beverages, that includes alcohol, juices and soft drinks. Per capita consumption has more than doubled over the last decade, from 10.5 gallons in 1993 to 22.6 in 2003, according to the Beverage Marketing Corporation.

Lt. Gov. John Cherry has proposed a 10-cent per bottle surcharge on bottled water. It will not be a direct tax to the consumer, but to the bottler. The modest proposal will raise $118 million a year, and it will be used to restore the Michigan Promise Scholarship axed last month in the state budget.

“It's time for the big bottlers to pay their water bill, just like you and I do,” Cherry said. “We can use the proceeds from that water bill to fund the education our young people need to compete, as well as the protection of our water resources Michigan desperately needs.”

Education is the number one factor that will help diversify the economy and improve the economy. The $4,000 Promise Scholarship, which impacts higher education funding for 96,000 students, was axed, and parents and students are livid over it. It will cost $100 million to restore the scholarship.

The leftover $18 million would go toward funding the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)'s wetlands protection program, which nearly was transferred to the federal government this fiscal year for lack of funding, and other conservation initiatives.

“We are surrounded by majestic Great Lakes, as well as tens of thousands of inland lakes, rivers, and streams,” Cherry said. “For hundreds of years, water has defined our lives, our livelihoods, and our unique Michigan culture. Today, it is threatened by pollution and depletion.”

Although nothing in the legislation would stop the producer from passing the cost onto the consumer, considering they pay nothing for our water; little of the cost should be passed onto the consumer.

As expected, Nestle, other bottlers and Republicans immediately began running around like Chicken Little telling us the sky was falling and it was a “job killer.” Really, perhaps the bottlers can go to the southwest part of the country and get their free water.

Major battle won on the smokefree front, but the public health war continues

I have written 90 posts over three years on the workplace smoking ban, and now that the Legislature finally did the right thing and approved a partial ban on Thursday, I’m experiencing a slight case of withdrawal.

I got a pretty good fix this weekend, and I had to knock down some of the same, tired old arguments from the other side. I had a long running debate on Facebook with a former colleague at the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus. I was, frankly, quite surprised that he was against it, and the arguments he used. Again, so much for the myth of the “liberal media.”

His tired arguments mirrored the same arguments the Op-Ed page of the paper used to editorialize against it. But, over the weekend they ran a poll, and support in conservative Livingston County was more than 60 prevent for the workplace smoking ban. Like I have said time after time, this is a nonpartisan issue.

The Detroit News ran a CyberSurvey on the issue, and 49.3 percent say are pleased with the smoking ban that was passed, and just 36 percent said it was too restrictive. Another 14 percent said it did not go far enough. I don’t think it went far enough either, but I am more than satisfied, for now. Compromise is necessary to get things done in politics. Like President Obama recently said about the health care reform debate, “we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

That means 64 percent who took the survey support a workplace smoking ban and 36 percent do not. That pretty much reflects how the entire state feels.

It was also interesting to read the rightwing blogs. Even though almost 70 percent of Michigan residents support the ban, not one right wing blog was for it, not one. If you need any more proof on how out of touch the Republican Party really is there it is. Plus, it was a bipartisan bill, and Republicans and Democrats were on both sides of the issue.

Here’s a little sample of the rightwing opinion:

“Nanny Statists Win”
“Here's a thought: why not let people make their own decisions?”

Here’s another one:

“I'm left scratching my head that people in my own party, the Party of Lincoln and Reagan, the Grand Ol' Party, are trumpeting about the smoking ban in Michigan along with Democrats who have ruined our state, giving a failed governor a Leftist victory in removing more freedoms from the citizenry.”

That’s a lot of lies in one run-on sentence.

Some are hard to follow, but here is one, as near as I can tell, on how a ban will hurt bar business. That myth, of course, has long been debunked:

“An after work beer and a smoke at a bar will not translate to an after work beer in the local watering hole alone. Bar patronage will decrease.”

Here’s another one:

“Arguments abound on the RINO designation with those who still support the Republicans that vote "progressive," saying "but you should concentrate on the 95% that you agree with them on.. “

The good news is I expect to continue to write about the workplace smoking ban. I think there was enough support in the House to pass a clean bill. The fight is not over. This is a huge victory; make no mistake about that, but that was the big battle, and we still have a smaller battle before we have won the war.

There is still a bill in the Senate, Senate Bill 114, that completely bans smoking, including casinos. This was a true grassroots effort, and we need to step up the pressure to pass this and protect all workers, no matter where they work. We still have a year left in the current legislative session. A great time to pass this would be during the lame duck session next December.

Michigan Notable Books of 2010 has something for every one

The 2010 list of Michigan Notable Books includes a famous author, a biography on Michigan’s most well-known rocker and the story if perhaps the most famous Michigan sporting event that changed how we watch college basketball in March.

Every year, the Library of Michigan selects up to 20 of the most notable books, either written by a Michigan resident or about Michigan or the Great Lakes. The selected books are honored in the year after their publication or copyright date. Each selected title speaks to our state's rich cultural, historical, and literary heritage and proves without a doubt that some of the greatest stories are found in the Great Lakes State. Michigan Notable Books selection committee includes journalists, library, book sellers and academics, and they screen 250 up to 400 titles per year to come up with the best of Michigan.

Michigan Notable Books is an annual program with roots stretching back to Michigan Week 1991. Here are 2010’s selections:

American Salvage: Stories by Bonnie Jo Campbell (Wayne State University Press).

Annie's Ghosts: A Journey into a Family's Secret by Steve Luxenberg (Hyperion).

The Art Student's War: A Novel by Brad Leithauser (Alfred A. Knopf).

Bath Massacre: America's First School Bombing by Arnie Bernstein (University of Michigan Press).

Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jungle City by Greg Grandin (Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt).

Have a Little Faith: A True Story of a Last Request by Mitch Albom (Hyperion).

Isadore's Secret: Sin, Murder, and Confession in a Northern Michigan Town by Mardi Link (University of Michigan Press).

January's Sparrow by Patricia Polacco (Philomel).

The Lost Tiki Palaces of Detroit: Stories by Michael Zadoorian (Wayne State University Press).

Michigan's Columbus: The Life of Douglass Houghton by Steve Lehto (Momentum Books).

Nothing But a Smile: A Novel by Steve Amick (Pantheon Books).

Orlando M. Poe: Civil War General and Great Lakes Engineer, by Paul Taylor (Kent State University Press).

Our People, Our Journey: The Little River Band of Ottawa Indians by James M. McClurken (Michigan State University Press).

Pandora's Locks: The Opening of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway by Jeff Alexander (Michigan State University Press).

Roses and Revolutions: The Selected Writings of Dudley Randall edited by Melba Joyce Boyd (Wayne State University Press).

Season of Water and Ice by Donald Lystra (Switch Grass Books/Northern Illinois University Press).

Stitches: A Memoir by David Small (W. W. Norton)

Travelin' Man: On the Road and Behind the Scenes with Bob Seger by Tom Weschler (Wayne State University Press).

Up the Rouge!: Paddling Detroit's Hidden River by Joel Thurtell. Photographs by Patricia Beck (Wayne State University Press).

When March Went Mad: The Game That Transformed Basketball by Seth Davis (Times Books).

Newspaper misses the point on workplace smoking ban

As the smoke clears following the passage of the historic workplace smoking ban yesterday that includes bars and restaurants, it has been interesting to read all the congratulatory messages and the news report.

Not surprisingly, Livingston County’s Legislative delegation all voted against protecting the public from deadly secondhand smoke. All three are Republicans, but that should not matter in this important, bipartisan public health bill.

Reps. Bill Rogers, R-Brighton, and Cindy Denby, R-Handy Township, joined 23 other Republicans in voting no, but 20 of their fellow caucus members did the right thing and voted yes. Sen. Valde Garcia, R-Marion Township, joined 12 Republicans voting no, but nine did the right thing.

I respect Garcia, but his reasons for voting no were disappointing. He told the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus that many restaurants that allow smoking are investing in ventilation systems to prevent smoke from permeating buildings. He said the system of offering both smoking and non-smoking sections still works.

Really? Does he believe smoke obeys a non-smoking signs? If the Senate had held a hearing on the bill like the House did, he would have heard from Dr. Greg Holzman, the medical officer from the Michigan Department of Community Health (DCH), who testified in committee last March that there is no ventilation system invented that can clear out secondhand smoke.

My hometown paper’s editorial on this historic victory was not a surprise, considering they have called the 12-year fight unimportant and displayed a disturbing lack of understanding on how the Legislature works. But it was confusing, and it left readers unsure of what their position really is, other than they had a hole to fill as deadline approached.

It starts with this ridiculous gem: “Do Michigan lawmakers really want to take a position that it is OK to kill casino workers as long as there are some jobs saved in the process?
Apparently so.”

Please. That statement makes no sense when you later go on to say, “If business owners want to allow their customers to smoke, they should be allowed to. The public is free to choose other establishments if they don't like a smoke-filled environment.”

If it kills people, and it does, then it's not a freedom issue it’s a pubic health issue. The reality is that secondhand smoke kills. In fact, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen containing 4,000 chemicals, including 43 cancer-causing chemicals. In Michigan alone 3,000 people die each year from secondhand smoke. Smokers' rights end when their personal choices negatively impact the health and well-being of nonsmokers, and what freedom is it that allows their addiction to affect the 80 percent of the population that does not smoke? This is especially important given that secondhand smoke is the third leading preventable cause of death in the U.S.

As for jobs, it will have zero effect. How do we know? We have the results from the 37 other states with smoking bans, as well as from the many countries with smoking bans, like Ireland, Italy, Canada and Turkey.

After New York went smoke-free, studies were conducted to evaluate the impact of the smoking ban on restaurants and bars. The results showed an increase in employment and sales tax receipts from these establishments. Regardless, there have been absolutely no studies that show a negative economic impact resulting from a state-wide or country-wide smoking ban. In fact, two recent studies in Michigan reaffirm that fact.

The University of Michigan Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy released a study on May 29, 2009 that concluded the state's bars and restaurants would not be hurt by a proposed workplace smoking ban. Another recent study in the spring of 2008 by the leading Lansing research firm Public Sector Consultants Inc. - called “Smokefree workplaces: The Impact of House Bill 4163 on the Restaurant and Bar Industry in Michigan” – also found a smoking ban had no negative economic impact on bars and restaurants.

It should also be pointed out that the exception only applies to the gamming floor, not the casino’s bars and restaurants, which are smokefree. If anyone thinks we have giving up on banning smoking in the casinos, they are mistaken.

I believe a clean bill with no exceptions would have passed the House yesterday, thanks to the new freshman Representatives. Last session before it ended and all bills not signed into law died, the House took up a clean bill. It got the majority of votes, but it failed to get the required 56 votes to pass. I think this time around it would have gotten the required number.

It would have picked up Livingston County’s two House votes.

The fight is not over, and strange things have happened during Lame Duck.

Michigan is finally smoke free

LANSING -- Michigan bars and restaurants will be smoke free on May 1 after the Michigan House and Senate passed House Bill 4377 with a bipartisan vote on Thursday.

The compromise exempts Detroit’s three casinos and so-called cigar bars, but gaining approval of the same version of the bill from both houses has been difficult.

“What better way to spread health and good cheer this time of year than passing this legislation to make Michigan workplaces smokefree,” said Sen. Ray Basham, D-Taylor, who has championed the cause for some 12 years. “I have been working to protect the health of Michigan workers for more than ten years, and today we are taking a huge step forward for the state and executing the will of the people.”

The substitute passed the Senate by a vote of 24-13, and it immediately went across the Capitol where the House concurred in the substitute by a vote of 75-30. The governor is expected to sign the bill immediately.

The House initially passed the HB 4377 back in May, but the Senate maintained it would only take up a bill that had exceptions or carve outs. But Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks, introduced the substitute with exceptions after heavy pressure from the public to get a bill done. More than 60 percent of Michigan residents support a smoking ban, and supporters have been relentless in lobbying lawmakers.

“I appreciate the bipartisan support, especially the leadership of my colleagues Senators Ron Jelinek and Tom George, to make this bill a reality,” Basham said. “Ideally, I would like to have seen this bill pass with no exemptions, but I was willing to reach a compromise to see this become law. I will continue to advocate for the health of all Michigan workers, and I hope we can revisit the issue of casino floors in the future.”

They still had to fight off substitutes and amendments that would have weakened the bill or made it harder to pass in the House. Proposals included a bill with no exceptions, allowing bars located near the casinos a waiver if they had a drop in business and an exception for Detroit Metro Airport.

The most interesting amendment came from Sen. John Gleason, D-Flushing, that proposed naming the act the “Raymond Basham Smokefree Michigan Act.”

“There is not a single person in this chamber or who has left because of term limits who hadn't been approached by Senator Basham,” Gleason said. “I think his diligence and devotion to Michigan's health care should be rewarded with this small act.”

But Basham declined because the act is named after the late Dr. Ronald Davis. Davis is the former Director of the Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention at the Henry Ford Health System, and he is the former president of the American Medical Association (AMA). Dr. Davis also served as director of the Center for Disease Control’s Office on Smoking and Health from 1987 to 1991.

House bills will allow residents to register to vote online

LANSING – House Democrats continue to eliminate barriers to voting and make it easier for residents to register to vote and to discharge their duty as U.S. citizens and vote.

On Wednesday the House Ethics and Elections Committee took testimony on two bills that will allow residents to register to vote online. As more people go online to pay bills, pay their taxes and get their news, this is a natural. The committee took testimony on House Bills 4539 and 4540, and they are expected to vote them out to the full House floor next week.

Thanks to House Democrats, Michigan is again becoming a leader in removing barriers to vote. If the bill becomes law, Michigan would follow Arizona and Washington as just the third state in the nation offering online voter registration. Michigan was one of the first states to adopt motor voter registration.

If approved, a person who was not registered to vote at the address where he or she was residing could submit a voter registration application electronically on the website. A person who submitted an application electronically would have to do all of the following:
Attest to the truth of the information provided on the voter registration application by affirmatively accepting the information as true.
Affirmatively assent to the use of his or her most recent digitized signature if captured or reproduced by the Secretary of State.
Sign the voter registration application with an electronic signature.

Amendments to enhance security are expected, but the bills have the support of the Michigan Association of Municipal Clerks, Michigan Townships Association and Michigan Association of County Clerks.

The legislation, however, faces an uncertain future in the Republican-controlled Senate, and forward looking bill designed to make it easier for people to vote have been met with silence in that chamber, even though they have the backing municipal clerks and the Republican Secretary of State.

Bills sent over from the House so far include no reason absentee voting, early voting and allowing 16-year-olds to pre-register to vote.

Some Democrats pushing to change the name of the annul state Jeff-Jack dinner

One thing I like about being a Democrat is that there are so many different kinds of people in the party with many different views.

We have Blue Dogs, pro-life Democrats and Pro-choice Democrats. Try finding a pro-choice Republican; They are few and far between and becoming more scarce everyday. We often fight with each other because we have such a big tent. Unlike the Republicans, we don’t have a purity test. I guess that’s why more people call themselves Democrats.

So, it was with surprise that I learned that the Livingston County Democratic Party recently passed a resolution asking the Michigan Democratic Party to remove the name of President Andrew Jackson’s name from the title of the annual Jefferson-Jackson Day Dinner, the MDP’s largest annual fundraising event held at Cobo Hall in March, known affectingly as the Jeff-Jack.

The resolution objects to the 7th President’s human rights record and his actions toward Native Americans. The notorious Indian Removal Act of 1830 forcibly removed Native American tribes from their traditional tribal lands in the southern states of Georgia and Florida to west of Mississippi, and it became known as the “Trail of Tears.”

Despite that record, someone told me Jackson should not be viewed in the light of today’s policies. Regardless, it raises an interesting debate. The Indian Removal Act was very popular at the time, and many Americans favored extermination of the Native American tribes instead of removal.

The Livingston County Republican Party calls their annual fundraising dinner the Reagan Dinner, and Reagan was no great shakes as a president; he wasn’t even the best Republican president.

Jackson, like many of the Founding Fathers, was a slave holder. But unlike previous presidents, he was the first president that was not born an aristocrat.

He was born in poverty from Irish immigrant parents in 1767 in Coastal Carolina, and his father died while his mother was pregnant with him. Jackson and his brother joined the Continental Army as boys serving as messengers during the Revolutionary War, and they served where the most vicious fighting of the war occurred in the Carolinas where atrocities on both sides occurred. Jackson and his brother contracted Small Pox while captives of the British, but his brother did not survive, leaving Jackson with no family.

Jackson was a self-made man and a frontiersman that became rich farming and raising race horses, but, unfortunately, he became rich on the work of slaves in Tennessee.

Jackson became a nationally recognized cultural hero following his defeat of the British in the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, earning the nickname “Old Hickory.” The only thing close is the adoration of General Dwight Eisenhower following World War II.

This is an interesting question that should be examined and debated. There is no doubt Jackson was a great man, but he needs to be viewed in the time he lived. No one is denying George Washington was a great man, but he owned some 300 slaves when he died. There is also no doubt Abraham Lincoln was a great man, but he was actually hated by many during his time. And, even though he signed the Emancipation Promulgation freeing the slaves, he favored colonizing them outside of the United States.

Voting for the 2009 “Scrooge of the Year” award for the greediest, most cold-hearted company or person of the year is underway

The nominations are complete and voting for the 2009 “Scrooge of the Year” award for the greediest, most cold-hearted company or person of the year.

National Jobs with Justice was seeking nominations for its 2009 “Scrooge of the Year” award until Dec. 7, and the voting is underway for the top enemies of working men and women.

The nominees are Bank of America, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Hyatt Hotels, Publix Supermarkets, Student Loan Companies Sallie Mae & Citibank or if you are not happy with those enemies of working people, you can write in your own candidate. There is a great field of scumbag candidates.

Bank of America
Bank of America had a hand in the worst of the subprime lending excesses, providing financing to the four of the top five largest subprime lenders during the years prior to the crash including Countrywide Financial, Ameriquest, New Century Financial Corp, and First Franklin. Between them, these four firms issued over $320 billion in subprime loans from 2005-2007. As a result of these kinds of abuses, Bank of America helped crash the economy and then needed a bailout.

Bank of America accepted bailouts and backstops totaling $199.2 billion, with taxpayers still on the hook for $57.8 billion, plus an unknown amount from the Federal Reserve's $8 trillion in emergency programs. This money was supposed to help the banks get the economy going again, but little of this money has gone to relieve struggling homeowners and increase the flow of credit to small businesses.

In spite of receiving all this public assistance, Bank of America continues to work against the public good. During 2008 and the first half of 2009, BofA opposed bills which would directly benefit consumers, Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights and the Foreclosure Prevention Act, Helping Families Save their Homes Act, Truth-in Lending Act, Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act.

To carry out its agenda, Bank of America has hired any number of unsavory lobbyists, including, in 2009, Andrew Barbour of the Smith-Free Group. Prior to working for Bank of America, Barbour represented the Financial Services Roundtable in its fight against legislation to restrict payday lending to the military because it would have capped interest rates on loans extended to soldiers and their families at 36 percent. Bank of America also opposed the bill.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
This Scrooge likes you to think it is the voice of American business. But in reality, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- and its CEO Tom Donohue -- are pushing a narrow, radical agenda. It's becoming increasingly clear that the Chamber has become a front group for a few narrow interests, not a membership association that represents the voice of mainstream American businesses. And it is increasingly at odds with both small and green businesses. "The U.S. Chamber of Commerce often says it speaks for 3 million members, businesses both large and small," notes the New York Times. "What it doesn't promote as readily is that 19 supporters last year provided a third of the trade group's total revenue."

It is no surprise that the Chamber opposes the Employee Free Choice Act, or even paid sick days for swine flu. But it doesn't stop there. Members of the U.S. Chamber have been dropping like flies. Not only major corporations, but many local chambers of commerce, have quit or distanced themselves. One of the top concerns? The Chamber's extreme stance on environmental issues, including a call for a "Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century" on climate change. There is also broad disagreement with the U.S. Chamber on health insurance reform, especially after it was caught red-handed trying to raise $50,000 to hire a "respected economist" to "study" (read: attack) health reform.

The bottom line? The Chamber is the ultimate Scrooge. Not only will Tom Donohue fight hard to put a lump of coal in your stocking at taxpayer expense, but it will claim that the lump of coal represents the "voice of American business" and is good for you.

But don't take our word for it. "They don't represent me," says Mark Jaffe, CEO of the Greater New York Chamber of Commerce. He adds, "they are playing games" with their membership numbers. "They don't have half the businesses in America as registered, dues-paying members." And he also notes that, "you have to be selfish, blind, or stupid not to want everybody to be required to have health care." Rob Black, vice-president of public policy for the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, says "we take a fundamentally different approach than the U.S. Chamber... we support a market-driven cap-and-trade system. It's good for business, but it's also a good way to try to spur innovation and new technologies."

system. It's good for business, but it's also a good way to try to spur innovation and new technologies."

Hyatt Hotels
Hyatt deserves a lump of coal in its stocking this year for its treatment of hotel housekeepers. A recently released academic study of worker injuries at 50 major hotels found that in the hotels studied, Hyatt housekeepers faced a greater risk of injuries than housekeepers at other hotel companies, and more than twice the risk of injury of other service sector workers.

In Boston, Hyatt fired the entire housekeeping departments of its three non-union hotels, replacing longtime employees making around $15/hour with subcontracted workers making the minimum wage. To add insult to injury Hyatt required Boston area housekeepers to train their replacements before they were fired.

At union Hyatts in San Francisco and Chicago, Hyatt is using the recession as an excuse to roll back healthcare and other hard-won contract standards. In Indianapolis, San Antonio, Long Beach and elsewhere Hyatt is fighting its own workers as they seek a fair process to organize a union.

While workers get the short end of the stick, Hyatt and its owners enjoyed a $1 billion pay day on November 5 when they cashed in on the initial public offering of Hyatt stock.

Publix Supermarkets
Publix Supermarkets is the 9th largest privately-held corporation in the US with 2008 revenues of over $24 billion. Since 2007, Publix has resisted calls to be a part of the solution to the human rights crisis in Florida's fields. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers and their allies are calling on Publix to pay just one penny more per pound for its tomatoes to directly improve worker's wages, and to work with the CIW to implement a code of conduct to protect farmworkers' basic human rights. Other corporations including Taco Bell, McDonald's, Subway, and Publix competitor Whole Foods have already agreed to these terms.

Publix, on the other hand, continues to purchase tomatoes from two of the growers tainted by last year's modern-day slavery prosecution, sends out videographers to tape farmworkers and their families at peaceful pickets, and refuses to support the growing partnership among farmworkers, Florida tomato growers, and retail food giants aimed at ending decades of farm labor abuse in Florida. For more, read Publix vs. Publix, a must-read analysis on the two faces of Publix.

Student Loan Companies Sallie Mae & Citibank
An increasing number of students rely on private companies to finance their college educations, yet these loans get very little oversight from government regulators. Private student loans are expensive, mostly variable-rate loans that cost more for those who can least afford them. They lack the flexible repayment options of federal student loans, functioning more like a credit card than a student loan.

The federal government is considering regulating these loans, and the companies who sell them are fighting back. Unsavory Sallie Mae alone has spent millions on lobbying this year, and has already contributed $125,500 to federal candidates for the 2010 cycle. By USSA's estimates, they've spent at least a quarter million on ads in Politico and other DC are newspapers. Lenders (we are not yet sure who) have also hired Qorvis communications, a controversial PR firm, to astroturf on the issue. Apparently, Qorvis sees this as one of their specialties. Some lenders, like Citi, have even emailed their borrowers and urged them to take action against reform, without, of course, letting them know that it could mean an investment in student aid, early learning, community colleges, etc.

You can vote now, and the loser will be announced on Dec. 21.

Jobs with Justice is a national organization with the vision of lifting up workers’ rights and struggles as part of a larger campaign for economic and social justice and worker‘s rights.