POPVOX’s Countdown of the Top Bills in 2013

---

I frequently use POPVOX to explore information about a bill — what’s in the text of a bill, who introduced it, what other’s are saying about, who those others are (individuals and corporations/organizations) — and to write a letter of opposition or support to my elected representatives.  My observation is that the right-wing nut jobs have more of a propensity to support/oppose legislation than do reasonable folks.  Those of us who oppose the right-wing agenda need to become more active and vocal so our elected representatives in Congress understand they need to support us too — not just the very loud and radical right wing base.

Here’s a copy of an email I received today from POPVOX itemizing the top 50 bills that garnered the most activity on POPVOX during the first half of the 113th Congress:

by RACHNA on DECEMBER 31, 2013

Members of Congress introduced more than 6,600 bills and resolutions in 2013. The Second Amendment and gun control legislation dominated the top bills list, the majority of which were introduced in the beginning of the year. Not surprisingly, the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” was also a top priority among POPVOX users, and also the House has voted to repeal some or all of it nearly 50 times.  

The Countdown of the Top 50 Bills

Together, POPVOX users from every state and Congressional district sent more than 900,000 messages to their lawmakers in Washington. These are the top 50 bills and proposals that POPVOX users weighed in on with Congress in 2013, ranked by the aggregate number of combined support and opposition.

• HR 321
  

  #50 Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act

  Would allow the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to conduct crucial scientific research into firearm safety, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). 

  146 Support | 3,076 Oppose

• HR 1369
  

  #49 Firearm Risk Protection Act

  Would require gun buyers to have liability insurance coverage before being allowed to purchase a weapon and imposes a fine of $10,000 if an owner is found not to have the required coverage; service members and law enforcement officers are exempt from this insurance requirement, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY).

  99 Support | 3,157 Oppose

• HR 965
  

  #48 Banning Saturday Night Specials

  Would prohibit the possession or transfer of junk guns, also known as Saturday Night Specials.

  152 Support | 3,133 Oppose

• HR 900
  

  #47 Cancel the Sequester Act

  A one-sentence bill that would cancel the sequester, or across-the-board federal spending cuts that were implemented in 2013.

  2,406 Support | 899 Oppose

• HR 890
  

  #46 Preserving Work Requirements for Welfare Programs Act

  Extends the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program through December 2013 and overturns President Obama’s efforts to waive welfare work requirements, according to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). This bill passed in the House on March 13, 2013, and is awaiting consideration by the Senate.

  3,208 Support | 120 Oppose

• HR 1005
  

  #45 Defund Obamacare Act

  To deauthorize appropriation of funds, and to rescind unobligated appropriations, to carry out the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

  2,905 Support | 478 Oppose

• HR 1094
  

  #44 Safeguard American Food Exports Act

  To prohibit the sale or transport of equines and equine parts in interstate or foreign commerce for human consumption.

  2,727 Support | 707 Oppose

• HR 61
  

  #43 Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act

  Would stop the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from providing federal family planning assistance under Title X to abortion businesses until they certify they won’t provide and refer for abortions, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN).

  934 Support | 2,513 Oppose

• HR 431
  

  #42 Gun Transparency and Accountability (Gun TRAC) Act

  Would once again allow ATF to use information on guns traced to crimes; it would remove the requirement that background checks be destroyed within 24 hours; and it would eliminate the ban on federally required inventory audits of gun dealerships, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Jackie Speier(D-CA).   

  102 Support | 3,348 Oppose

• HR 793
  

  #41 Firearm Safety and Buyback Grant Act

  Would establish a grant program within the Department of Justice in which grants would be eligible to state, tribal, and local units of government and law enforcement agencies to carry out anti-violence campaigns, gun safety campaigns, and firearms buyback programs, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA).

  98 Support | 3,370 Oppose

• HR 2959
  

  #40 National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act

  To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State. This bill was passed by the House in the 112th Congress, but hasn’t been voted on in this Congress.

  3,106 Support | 385 Oppose

• HR 236
  

  #39 Crackdown on Deadbeat Gun Dealers Act

  Would increase the ability of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to: Inspect federal firearms licensees (FFLs) for compliance with recordkeeping requirements by increasing the allowable inspections per year from one to three; Increase the penalties for knowingly misrepresenting any facts about a firearms sale; and Authorize the Attorney General to suspend a dealer’s license and assess civil penalties for firearms violations, including failure to have secure gun storage or safety devices, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Jim Langevin (D-RI).

  184 Support | 3,319 Oppose

• Guns
  

  #38 Toomey-Schumer-Manchin Amendment

  A bipartisan group of senators — Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen.Joe Manchin (D-WV) — introduced a compromise proposal to expand background checks. The proposal would require states and the federal government to send all necessary records on criminals and the violently mentally ill to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). It also extends the existing background check system to gun shows and online sales. The Senate rejected the proposal in a 54 to 46 vote on April 17, 2013 — six votes short of the 60 needed.

  197 Support | 3,343 Oppose

• S 47
  

  #37 Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act

  To reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and includes measures on campus safety, tools to reduce domestic violence homicides, and protections for at-risk groups such as immigrants, tribal victims and members of the LGBT community, according to bill sponsors, Sen. Patrick Leahy(D-VT) and Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID). This bill was enacted into law after being signed by the President on March 7, 2013.

  573 Support | 3,008 Oppose

• S 374
  

  #36 Fix Gun Checks Act

  To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.Reported by Committee on Mar 12, 2013, and is awaiting consideration by the full Senate.

  218 Support | 3,532 Oppose

• HR 45
  

  #35 Repeal “Obamacare”

  To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. This bill passed in the House on May 16, 2013 by a 229-195 vote, and is awaiting consideration by the Senate.

  2,970 Support | 899 Oppose

• HR 238
  

  #34 Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act

  Would prohibit gun dealers whose licenses are revoked to convert their inventory to personal collections, to be sold without conducting background checks on purchasers, under current law, according to bill sponsor, Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI).

  178 Support | 3,714 Oppose

• HR 35
  

  #33 Safe Schools Act

  Would repeal federal laws mandating “gun free zones” around schools, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX).

  3,970 Support | 185 Oppose

• HR 538
  

  #32 PLEA Act

  To protect the Nation’s law enforcement officers by banning the Five-seveN Pistol and 5.7 x 28mm SS190, SS192, SS195LF, SS196, and SS197 cartridges, testing handguns and ammunition for capability to penetrate body armor, and prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or purchase of such handguns or ammunition by civilians.

  143 Support | 4,051 Oppose

• HR 575
  

  #31 Second Amendment Protection Act

  Would prohibit funding to the United Nations unless the President can certify that a United Nations treaty does not infringe on individual rights protected by the Constitution, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX). 

  4,083 Support | 145 Oppose

• HR 437
  

  #30 Assault Weapons Ban

  Would ban the future sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of 157 specific kinds of semi-automatic guns and impose the same restrictions on ammunition magazines that contain more than 10 rounds. Excludes 2,258 legitimate hunting and sporting rifles and shotguns by specific make and model, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY).

  160 Support | 4,227 Oppose

• S 815
  

  #29 Employment Non-Discrimination Act

  To prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This bill passed in the Senate on November 7, 2013 by a 64 to 32 vote, and is awaiting consideration by the House.

  233 Support | 4,178 Oppose

• HR 227
  

  #28 Buyback Our Safety Act

  To establish a gun buyback grant program.

  134 Support | 4,292 Oppose

• S 2
  

  #27 Sandy Hook Elementary School Violence Reduction Act

  To reduce violence and protect the citizens of the United States.

  169 Support | 4,357 Oppose

• HR 25
  

  #26 Fair Tax Act

  Would repeal all Federal corporate and individual income taxes, payroll taxes, self-employment taxes, capital gains taxes, the death tax, and gift taxes – and replace them with a revenue-neutral personal consumption tax, according to bill sponsor, Rep. Rob Woodall (R-GA). 

  4,219 Support | 333 Oppose

• HR 226
  

  #25 Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against tax for surrendering to authorities certain assault weapons.

  143 Support | 4,488 Oppose

• S 174
  

  #24 Ammunition Background Check Act

  To appropriately restrict sales of ammunition.

  187 Support | 4,769 Oppose

• S 336
  

  #23 Marketplace Fairness Act

  Would give states the option to require the collection of sales and use taxes already owed under State law by out-of-state businesses, rather than rely on consumers to remit those taxes to the States—the method of tax collection to which they are now restricted, according to bill sponsor, Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY).

  205 Support | 4,861 Oppose

• HR 137
  

  #22 Fix Gun Checks Act

  To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.

  522 Support | 4,595 Oppose

• S 147
  

  #21 Common Sense Concealed Firearms Permit Act

  To establish minimum standards for States that allow the carrying of concealed firearms.

  215 Support | 5,017 Oppose

• S 34
  

  #20 Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act

  To increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists.

  390 Support | 4,842 Oppose

• S 22
  

  #19 Gun Show Background Check Act

  To establish background check procedures for gun shows.

  442 Support | 5,049 Oppose

• S 82
  

  #18 Separation of Powers Restoration & Second Amendment Protection Act

  To provide that any executive action infringing on the Second Amendment has no force or effect, and to prohibit the use of funds for certain purposes.

  5,728 Support | 243 Oppose

• HR 410
  

  #17 Restore the Constitution Act

  To provide that any executive action infringing on the Second Amendment has no force or effect, and to prohibit the use of funds for certain purposes.

  5,914 Support | 263 Oppose

• HR 499
  

  #16 Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act

  To decriminalize marijuana at the Federal level, to leave to the States a power to regulate marijuana that is similar to the power they have to regulate alcohol.

  5,824 Support | 420 Oppose

• S 35
  

  #15 Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act

  To require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.

  308 Support | 6,558 Oppose

• S 33
  

  #14 Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act

  To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

  324 Support | 6,863 Oppose

• HR 65
  

  #13 Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act

  Raising the age of legal handgun ownership to 21.

  514 Support | 7,193 Oppose

• HR 21
  

  #12 NRA Members Gun Safety Act

  To provide for greater safety in the use of firearms.

  536 Support | 7,770 Oppose

• HR 34
  

  #11 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act

  To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms.

  362 Support | 8,402 Oppose

• HR 141
  

  #10 Gun Show Loophole Closing Act

  To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows.

  1,406 Support | 7,591 Oppose

• HR 2682
  

  #9 Defund Obamacare Act

  To prohibit the funding of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

  9,365 Support | 307 Oppose

• S 150
  

  #8 Assault Weapons Ban

  To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited.

  633 Support | 9,409 Oppose

• HR 142
  

  #7 Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act

  To require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.

  617 Support | 9,508 Oppose

• HR 117
  

  #6 Handgun Licensing and Registration Act

  To provide for the mandatory licensing and registration of handguns.

  553 Support | 9,619 Oppose

• HR 133
  

  #5 Citizens Protection Act

  To repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and amendments to that Act.

  9,671 Support | 651 Oppose

• HR 138
  

  #4 Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act

  To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

  756 Support | 10,828 Oppose

• S 744
  

  #3 Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act

  To provide for comprehensive immigration reform. This bill passed in the Senate on June 27, 2013 and is awaiting consideration by the House.

  1,385 Support | 10,212 Oppose

• HJRes 15
  

  #2 Repealing the 22nd Amendment

  Proposing an amendment to the US Constitution to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

  151 Support | 12,984 Oppose

• S 649
  

  #1 Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act

  To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.

  304 Support | 14,110 Oppose

HJRes107 Introduced to Resolve Damage Created by Citizens United Ruling

113th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. J. RES. 107

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 16, 2014

Mr. Yarmuth D-KY (for himself, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Sarbanes, and Mr. Cohen) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures with respect to Federal elections.

That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

1. Financial expenditures, or in-kind equivalents, with respect to a candidate for Federal office, without regard to whether or not a communication expressly advocates the election or defeat of a specified candidate in the election, shall not constitute protected speech, as guaranteed by this Constitution or any amendment to this Constitution.
2. Congress shall have the power to enact a mandatory public financing system to provide funds to qualified candidates in elections for Federal office, which shall be the sole source of funds raised or spent with respect to Federal elections.
3. Congress shall have power to enforce the provisions of this article by appropriate legislation.

A County-by-County Analysis of Election Administration in Swing States in the 2012 Election

By Anna Chu, Joshua Field, and Charles Posner

Voting is one of the critical ways for citizens to voice their opinions and desires to leaders and express their will for the direction of the country. But while voting is the crucial bedrock of a healthy democracy, citizens’ access to voting varies considerably within the states where elections are the most hotly contested.

With election administration delegated to officials and boards in more than 3,000 counties and localities in the United States, the ease with which one exercises his or her right to vote can depend on where he or she lives. Not only do state voting laws differ across the nation, even within a state, county-based election administration varies widely.

This report evaluates the election performance of counties in the 17 states that had the smallest margin of victory between the two presidential candidates in 2012. This analysis allows us to better understand how well the election process is working within a state, and will hopefully encourage state and local officials to consider how they can improve the voting experience for their citizens.

Read more and download the full report here.

Also see: Explore the Data: Unequal Access State by State

Under-Insured and Incompetent—Company Behind West Virginia’s Chemical Spill Files For Bankruptcy

BY JEFF SPROSS

CREDIT: AP PHOTO/TYLER EVERT

According to the Charleston Gazette, Freedom Industries filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy today.

On January 10, a tank owned by Freedom spilled 7,500 gallons of 4-Methylcyclohexane Methanol (MCHM) — a chemical used to wash coal of its impurities — into West Virginia’s Elk River. As a result, over 300,000 people in the state were left without drinking water for almost five days, and numerous reports of illnesses possibly related to the spill are already filtering in.

According to an anonymous source close to the company who spoke to the Gazette, they believe the spill may have been caused by a broken pipe that allowed water to flow under the tanks. The water then froze, splitting the tank open from below. The tanks were surrounded by a retaining wall — which state officials had described as “shoddy” — but they were sitting on gravel, allowing the chemical spill to leach into the ground below.

Freedom’s filing lists $1 to $10 million in assets, $1 to $10 million in liabilities, and 200 to 999 creditors.

As of Thursday, at least 20 lawsuits had been filed against Freedom Industries over the leak. The company reportedly lacks an umbrella insurance policy, and what coverage it does have is “inadequate to cover the amount of claims in this case.”

“Under the bankruptcy code,” the Gazette reports, “Chapter 11 permits a company to reorganize and continue operating.” Chapter 11 also requires all creditors to stop all collection attempts.

As this case winds its way through the court system, the public process will give West Virginians a very good sense of what was going on behind the scenes of this company that has caused to much disruption in their lives.

---

This material [the article above] was created by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. It was created for the Progress Report, the daily e-mail publication of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Click here to subscribe.

House Republicans Are Pushing A Bill That Would Force The IRS To Audit Rape Victims

BY TARA CULP-RESSLER

“House Republicans Are Pushing A Bill That Would Force The IRS To Audit Rape Victims”

PHOTO CREDIT: AP PHOTO/MIKE GROLL

House Republicans are currently advancing the “No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act,” or HR 7, a measure that would impose sweeping restrictions on abortion coverage that could make the procedure less affordable for Americans across the country. In addition to preventing low-income women from using their Medicaid coverage to access abortion, HR 7 could also have dramatic implications for the tax code and the private insurance market. One of its most controversial provisions could actually require the Internal Revenue Service to conduct audits of rape victims.

Why? Because HR 7 eliminates medical-expense deductions for abortion care, essentially raising taxes on the women who opt to have an abortion. Like many abortion restrictions, this provision includes an exemption for victims of rape and incest, as well as women who encounter life-threatening complications from their pregnancies. But in order to enforce those exceptions, the IRS would have to verify that the women who are claiming a medical-expense deduction for an abortion fall into one of those three categories, to ensure they’re not committing tax fraud.

Essentially, that would empower the government agency to have the final say over what “counts” as a sexual assault or a life-threatening situation. And that, in turn, would force victims to prove their case.

“Imagine having to recount a sexual assault — a horrifyingly painful, personal experience — to a tax collector,” NARAL Pro-Choice America says in an action alert to its members to encourage them to mobilize against HR 7. “An anti-choice bill in Congress would do just that. It could force sexual assault survivors who access abortion care to prove the assault occurred.”

That certainly sounds horrific. However, it’s important to remember that HR 7 is hardly the only piece of anti-choice legislation that sets up this dynamic.

The biggest political controversies over abortion policies throughout the past year have centered on rape victims, highlighting the anti-abortion laws that don’t extend any exceptions to them. It’s easy to see why the pro-choice community focuses on leveraging the outrage surrounding rape and abortion. Voters overwhelmingly favor legal abortion access for individuals who have become pregnant from rape, and policies that don’t fall in line with that seem especially callous.

But even when abortion restrictions do include some kind rape exception, as HR 7 does, the issues don’t end there. Exceptions for rape victims have some unintended consequences. They require some kind of system to separate the women who have become pregnant from sexual assault from the other women who want to end a pregnancy for a different reason. They essentially necessitate “rape audits.”

And in states across the country, that’s exactly what’s already occurring. The audits aren’t being conducted by the IRS, but they are being conducted by state officials.

Medicaid coverage for abortion services provides the best example of this. The Hyde Amendment, the policy that currently forbids low-income women from using their Medicaid coverage to help pay for abortion services, includes the same exceptions as HR 7 does. Thirty two states and the District of Columbia follow that federal standard for their local Medicaid funds — so, if the women who live there want to claim one of those exemptions, they already need to sufficiently prove why they deserve it. Some states require more proof than others. In 22 states, low-income rape victims who want to use their Medicaid coverage to pay for their abortion need to present a doctor’s note. Eleven other states require them to file a report with law enforcement or a social services agency. Last year, Iowa approved a law that requires the governor to personally approve each woman who’s seeking an exception to the Medicaid coverage ban.

Studies have found that these exceptions don’t operate as intended. Most rape victims who rely on Medicaid don’t actually end up getting reimbursed for the procedure, largely because of all the red tape. “Basically these exceptions don’t work. It’s really a myth that there is coverage that is still provided,” Stephanie Poggi, the executive director of the National Network of Abortion Funds, told the Washington Post.

Nonetheless, that hasn’t stopped state legislatures from moving forward with similar restrictions in other areas of the insurance industry. Outside of Medicaid, several states have already imposed abortion restrictions on the private insurance market that are similar to HR 7. And the health reform law has given states an opportunity to impose coverage bans on the procedure in their new insurance marketplaces.

We already live in a world in which navigating insurance coverage for abortion is so complicated that many women simply assume their insurer won’t pay for it, and end up financing the entire cost out-of-pocket. And we already live in a world in which victims of sexual assault are forced to prove the validity of their experiences to a skeptical society that doubts they’re telling the truth. We certainly live in a world that’s enacted nearly as many barriers to abortion access as humanly possible. Abortion restrictions that assume that some women’s reasons for terminating a pregnancy are somehow more valid than others exploits all of these dynamics. HR 7 fits neatly into this worldview — but it’s a continuation of a trend, rather than a brand-new outrage.

---

This material [the article above] was created by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. It was created for the Progress Report, the daily e-mail publication of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Click here to subscribe.