TONI VAN PELT

We urge you to actively oppose H.J. Res. 42 when it comes to the floor. This measure would repeal a Department of Labor rule intended to implement a bipartisan agreement on implementing a provision in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 that allows states to drug test unemployment insurance (UI) applicants in certain circumstances. In 2012, Congress approved a bipartisan compromise on drug testing unemployment insurance claimants. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res 83, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. As CEO of CKE Restaurants, his businesses have repeatedly violated the Fair Labor Standards Act, the chief statute which he would be charged with enforcing as Labor Secretary. The Department of Labor has investigated Mr. Puzders restaurants often during his 16 years tenure in that position, and has found violations of wage and hour laws in most of those investigations. He has been an outspoken critic of the very overtime and minimum wage rules which guarantee employees a living wage. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company. We write to express its strong opposition to the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor. ISHV believes it is the ethical obligation of all members of our nationwide community and most especially the Labor Department to accept responsibility for the well-being of society, guaranteeing the right to gainful employment, social security and health care benefits including those of women, racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities. The Secretary of Labor is the nations most senior official tasked with ensuring the well-being and rights of working people and advancing their employment opportunities, and is therefore of great importance to women and their families. Mr. Puzders record is entirely inconsistent with these duties. We submit these comments on the Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, Titled Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. As the interim guidance implements the January 30, 2017 Executive Order, the authority to issue the interim guidance depends on the validity of the Executive Order. In the Executive Order, the President directs federal agencies to identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed for every new existing regulation promulgated. For fiscal year 2017, the Executive Order directs federal agencies to ensure that the total incremental costs from all new and repealed regulations is no greater than $0. For subsequent fiscal years, the Executive Order directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to place a dollar cap on incremental costs allowed for each agency in issuing new and repealing existing regulations. The Interim Guidance is directed at Section 2 of the Executive Order, the provisions that apply to the current fiscal year. We understand that the House will soon consider H.R. 985, the "Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2015." We write to strongly oppose Section 2 of H.R. 985. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. We write to reiterate our strong view that the Department of Labors fiduciary rule, which requires those who give retirement savings advice to put their clients best interest first must be allowed to go into effect as planned in April; and to urge you to ask the nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor, Alex Acosta, to affirm his commitment to the rule being implemented on time. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company.

We write to express our profound concerns about a number of President Trumps recent executive orders and policy statements and their connection to the nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. In his first week in office, President Trump has made extraordinary claims of executive authority, has called for a major investigation into voter fraud, and has outlined numerous policy changes that pose grave dangers to civil liberties and civil rights. Given the reported involvement of Senator Sessions in advising President Trump on some of these matters, we believe you have a profound duty as Chairman and ask that you do everything necessary to ensure that Committee members are fully informed about the role of Senator Sessions in developing these new orders and proposals and his plans to implement and execute them. We are writing to express our views on the factors we urge you to consider in selecting the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. The Department of Justices Civil Rights Division was created by passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and this year marks its 60th anniversary. The Civil Rights Division and its eleven sections have the critical responsibility of enforcing our nations federal civil rights laws. Its mission is to provide equal treatment and equal justice under the law by enforcing and defending the civil rights of all Americans in such areas as voting, criminal justice, education, employment, housing, and public accommodations. Our federal civil rights laws have transformed the nation, outlawing discrimination in nearly every facet of American life. We are writing to express our strong opposition to the confirmation of Senator Jefferson B. Sessions (R-AL) to be the 84th Attorney General of the United States. Senator Sessions has a 30-year record of racial insensitivity, bias against immigrants, disregard for the rule of law, and hostility to the protection of civil rights that makes him unfit to serve as the Attorney General of the United States. In our democracy, the Attorney General is charged with enforcing our nations laws without prejudice and with an eye toward justice. And, just as important, the Attorney General has to be seen by the public - every member of the public, from every community - as a fair arbiter of justice. Unfortunately, there is little in Senator Sessions record, or learned from his confirmation hearing and supporting documents, that demonstrates that he would meet such a standard. We write to remind you in 1986, when then-U.S. Attorney Sessions was nominated by former President Ronald Reagan to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, the Republican-controlled Senate upheld its constitutional duty, undertaking a careful and comprehensive review of his record at that time. The Judiciary Committee was presented with compelling evidence that then-U.S. Attorney Sessions had a deeply troubling record as an opponent of civil rights enforcement, a champion of voter suppression tactics targeting African Americans, and a history of making racially-insensitive statements. This record included warning an African-American colleague to be careful about what he said to white folks, and speaking favorably about the Ku Klux Klan, as well as his prosecution of three African-American voting rights activists on dozens of charges that were promptly rejected by a jury. We are writing to express our opposition tothe confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of our laws, and its rulings can dramatically impact the lives and rights of all Americans. Judge Gorsuchs decade-long record on the federal bench, as well as his writings, speeches, and activities throughout his career, demonstrate he is a judge with an agenda. His frequent dissents and concurrences show he is out of the mainstream of legal thought and unwilling to accept the constructs of binding precedent and stare decisis when they dictate results he disfavors. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write to strongly oppose H.R. 985, the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. In this letter, we highlight the most egregious of its many harms. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC or the Commission) Proposed Enforcement Guidance on Unlawful Harassment (Proposed Enforcement Guidance). Protection against workplace harassment, including sex-based harassment, is key to achieving equal treatment. The undersigned organizations committed to workplace equality have joined to express strong support for the Proposed Enforcement Guidance and believe it will promote the reduction of discrimination and harassment in the workforce. The EEOC last issued policy guidance on harassment in 1999; since then, the law has evolved significantly. One-third of all EEOC charges include an allegation of harassment,1 demonstrating the need for current and robust guidance for employers and EEOC investigators. We write to call on you to recuse yourself from all Department of Justice investigations and actions regarding any interactions between President Donald Trump, his campaign staff or other individuals supporting his campaign and Russian actors during Trumps 2016 presidential campaign, any Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election, the activities of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and Russian actors, and leaks concerning these matters. We are writing to urge that you conduct a thorough review of the prior record of Alex Acosta as you consider his nomination for U.S. Secretary of Labor. As organizations that are committed to advancing the civil and human rights of all workers in America, we believe it is essential for this Committee to scrutinize Mr. Acostas tenure as the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice.

As you work to prepare legislation to fund the government past April 28, we write to strongly oppose the inclusion of ideological policy riders that are harmful to womens health. Opponents of womens health have long used the appropriations process to undermine womens access to comprehensive reproductive care, including access to safe and legal abortion. We continue to strongly oppose policy riders that deny insurance coverage of abortion for women enrolled in Medicaid, women who work for the federal government, women who live in the District of Columbia, and others, as well as riders that embolden health care entities to refuse to comply with laws that ensure womens access to abortion services. A number of new anti-womens health policy riders are included in individual FY 2017 appropriations bills passed either by the House Appropriations Committee or the full House. Additionally, passage of a much-needed supplemental funding bill to address the growing Zika crisis was brought to a halt last year in large part due to efforts to include a rider blocking funding for certain reproductive health providers in Puerto Rico that are uniquely positioned to provide critical health care services to women and men on the island. Finally, misguided efforts to block patients from accessing care at Planned Parenthood health centers have threatened to shut down the entire federal government and may do so again this year. We oppose the poison-pill riders we have seen in House appropriations bills, listed below, and any additional policy riders that would harm womens health. We urge you to oppose efforts to cut Supplemental Security Income (SSI) to offset the costs of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV program). H.R. 2824 would reauthorize the MIECHV program, which funds voluntary, evidence-based home visiting programs for at-risk pregnant women and parents with young children up to kindergarten entry. The current MIECHV program has demonstrated beneficial outcomes associated with improved maternal and child health, including increased access to screening and early intervention for childhood disabilities.

We are writing to express our opposition to the confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of our laws, and its rulings can dramatically impact the lives and rights of all Americans. Judge Gorsuchs decade-long record on the federal bench, as well as his writings, speeches, and activities throughout his career, demonstrate he is a judge with an agenda. His frequent dissents and concurrences show he is out of the mainstream of legal thought and unwilling to accept the constructs of binding precedent and stare decisis when they dictate results he disfavors. If confirmed to the Supreme Court, which is closely divided on many critical issues, Judge Gorsuch would tip the balance in a direction that would undermine many of our core rights and legal protections. He lacks the impartiality and independence the American people expect and deserve from the federal bench. We join together as diverse voices from a variety of sectors to oppose the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by blocking aid to foreign organizations who use their own non-U.S. funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country. We respectfully request that you demonstrate your support for public health by opposing H.J.Res. 43 and S.J.Res. 13. As representatives of diverse areas of the nations public health infrastructure, we urge you to support another critical piece of that infrastructure: Title X, the nations only dedicated source of public funding for family planning. These resolutions would overturn an important rule finalized in December 2016 that protects the ability of local communities to develop family planning networks that work best for them. As members of the Act for Women campaign, we write to thank you for your leadership on the Womens Health Protection Act (S. 217/ H.R. 448). This campaign unites national, state, and local organizations working to support and advance this critical legislation.

As this Congressional session comes to a close, we want to make clear our strong commitment to the Women's Health Protection Act. It is no secret that anti-choice leaders and activists have increasingly sought new ways to undermine womens access to abortion care. Even with the landmark Supreme Court victory this summer in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, many state legislators are still determined to erode, if not eradicate, the promise of Roe v. Wade. Since 2011, states have enacted 334 abortion restrictions, including laws that interfere with the practice of medicine by mandating unnecessary procedures and unconstitutional bans on abortion before viability.



We write to express our profound concerns about a number of President Trumps recent executive orders and policy statements and their connection to the nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. In his first week in office, President Trump has made extraordinary claims of executive authority, has called for a major investigation into voter fraud, and has outlined numerous policy changes that pose grave dangers to civil liberties and civil rights. Given the reported involvement of Senator Sessions in advising President Trump on some of these matters, we believe you have a profound duty as Chairman and ask that you do everything necessary to ensure that Committee members are fully informed about the role of Senator Sessions in developing these new orders and proposals and his plans to implement and execute them. We are writing to express our views on the factors we urge you to consider in selecting the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. The Department of Justices Civil Rights Division was created by passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and this year marks its 60th anniversary. The Civil Rights Division and its eleven sections have the critical responsibility of enforcing our nations federal civil rights laws. Its mission is to provide equal treatment and equal justice under the law by enforcing and defending the civil rights of all Americans in such areas as voting, criminal justice, education, employment, housing, and public accommodations. Our federal civil rights laws have transformed the nation, outlawing discrimination in nearly every facet of American life. We are writing to express our strong opposition to the confirmation of Senator Jefferson B. Sessions (R-AL) to be the 84th Attorney General of the United States. Senator Sessions has a 30-year record of racial insensitivity, bias against immigrants, disregard for the rule of law, and hostility to the protection of civil rights that makes him unfit to serve as the Attorney General of the United States. In our democracy, the Attorney General is charged with enforcing our nations laws without prejudice and with an eye toward justice. And, just as important, the Attorney General has to be seen by the public - every member of the public, from every community - as a fair arbiter of justice. Unfortunately, there is little in Senator Sessions record, or learned from his confirmation hearing and supporting documents, that demonstrates that he would meet such a standard. We write to remind you in 1986, when then-U.S. Attorney Sessions was nominated by former President Ronald Reagan to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, the Republican-controlled Senate upheld its constitutional duty, undertaking a careful and comprehensive review of his record at that time. The Judiciary Committee was presented with compelling evidence that then-U.S. Attorney Sessions had a deeply troubling record as an opponent of civil rights enforcement, a champion of voter suppression tactics targeting African Americans, and a history of making racially-insensitive statements. This record included warning an African-American colleague to be careful about what he said to white folks, and speaking favorably about the Ku Klux Klan, as well as his prosecution of three African-American voting rights activists on dozens of charges that were promptly rejected by a jury. We are writing to express our opposition tothe confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of our laws, and its rulings can dramatically impact the lives and rights of all Americans. Judge Gorsuchs decade-long record on the federal bench, as well as his writings, speeches, and activities throughout his career, demonstrate he is a judge with an agenda. His frequent dissents and concurrences show he is out of the mainstream of legal thought and unwilling to accept the constructs of binding precedent and stare decisis when they dictate results he disfavors. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write to strongly oppose H.R. 985, the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. In this letter, we highlight the most egregious of its many harms. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC or the Commission) Proposed Enforcement Guidance on Unlawful Harassment (Proposed Enforcement Guidance). Protection against workplace harassment, including sex-based harassment, is key to achieving equal treatment. The undersigned organizations committed to workplace equality have joined to express strong support for the Proposed Enforcement Guidance and believe it will promote the reduction of discrimination and harassment in the workforce. The EEOC last issued policy guidance on harassment in 1999; since then, the law has evolved significantly. One-third of all EEOC charges include an allegation of harassment,1 demonstrating the need for current and robust guidance for employers and EEOC investigators. We write to call on you to recuse yourself from all Department of Justice investigations and actions regarding any interactions between President Donald Trump, his campaign staff or other individuals supporting his campaign and Russian actors during Trumps 2016 presidential campaign, any Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election, the activities of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and Russian actors, and leaks concerning these matters. We are writing to urge that you conduct a thorough review of the prior record of Alex Acosta as you consider his nomination for U.S. Secretary of Labor. As organizations that are committed to advancing the civil and human rights of all workers in America, we believe it is essential for this Committee to scrutinize Mr. Acostas tenure as the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice.

We urge you to actively oppose H.J. Res. 42 when it comes to the floor. This measure would repeal a Department of Labor rule intended to implement a bipartisan agreement on implementing a provision in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 that allows states to drug test unemployment insurance (UI) applicants in certain circumstances. In 2012, Congress approved a bipartisan compromise on drug testing unemployment insurance claimants. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res 83, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. As CEO of CKE Restaurants, his businesses have repeatedly violated the Fair Labor Standards Act, the chief statute which he would be charged with enforcing as Labor Secretary. The Department of Labor has investigated Mr. Puzders restaurants often during his 16 years tenure in that position, and has found violations of wage and hour laws in most of those investigations. He has been an outspoken critic of the very overtime and minimum wage rules which guarantee employees a living wage. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company. We write to express its strong opposition to the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor. ISHV believes it is the ethical obligation of all members of our nationwide community and most especially the Labor Department to accept responsibility for the well-being of society, guaranteeing the right to gainful employment, social security and health care benefits including those of women, racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities. The Secretary of Labor is the nations most senior official tasked with ensuring the well-being and rights of working people and advancing their employment opportunities, and is therefore of great importance to women and their families. Mr. Puzders record is entirely inconsistent with these duties. We submit these comments on the Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, Titled Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. As the interim guidance implements the January 30, 2017 Executive Order, the authority to issue the interim guidance depends on the validity of the Executive Order. In the Executive Order, the President directs federal agencies to identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed for every new existing regulation promulgated. For fiscal year 2017, the Executive Order directs federal agencies to ensure that the total incremental costs from all new and repealed regulations is no greater than $0. For subsequent fiscal years, the Executive Order directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to place a dollar cap on incremental costs allowed for each agency in issuing new and repealing existing regulations. The Interim Guidance is directed at Section 2 of the Executive Order, the provisions that apply to the current fiscal year. We understand that the House will soon consider H.R. 985, the "Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2015." We write to strongly oppose Section 2 of H.R. 985. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. We write to reiterate our strong view that the Department of Labors fiduciary rule, which requires those who give retirement savings advice to put their clients best interest first must be allowed to go into effect as planned in April; and to urge you to ask the nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor, Alex Acosta, to affirm his commitment to the rule being implemented on time. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company.

We are writing to express our opposition to the confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of our laws, and its rulings can dramatically impact the lives and rights of all Americans. Judge Gorsuchs decade-long record on the federal bench, as well as his writings, speeches, and activities throughout his career, demonstrate he is a judge with an agenda. His frequent dissents and concurrences show he is out of the mainstream of legal thought and unwilling to accept the constructs of binding precedent and stare decisis when they dictate results he disfavors. If confirmed to the Supreme Court, which is closely divided on many critical issues, Judge Gorsuch would tip the balance in a direction that would undermine many of our core rights and legal protections. He lacks the impartiality and independence the American people expect and deserve from the federal bench. We join together as diverse voices from a variety of sectors to oppose the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by blocking aid to foreign organizations who use their own non-U.S. funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country. We respectfully request that you demonstrate your support for public health by opposing H.J.Res. 43 and S.J.Res. 13. As representatives of diverse areas of the nations public health infrastructure, we urge you to support another critical piece of that infrastructure: Title X, the nations only dedicated source of public funding for family planning. These resolutions would overturn an important rule finalized in December 2016 that protects the ability of local communities to develop family planning networks that work best for them. As members of the Act for Women campaign, we write to thank you for your leadership on the Womens Health Protection Act (S. 217/ H.R. 448). This campaign unites national, state, and local organizations working to support and advance this critical legislation.

As this Congressional session comes to a close, we want to make clear our strong commitment to the Women's Health Protection Act. It is no secret that anti-choice leaders and activists have increasingly sought new ways to undermine womens access to abortion care. Even with the landmark Supreme Court victory this summer in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, many state legislators are still determined to erode, if not eradicate, the promise of Roe v. Wade. Since 2011, states have enacted 334 abortion restrictions, including laws that interfere with the practice of medicine by mandating unnecessary procedures and unconstitutional bans on abortion before viability.



We respectfully request that you demonstrate your support for public health by opposing H.J.Res. 43 and S.J.Res. 13. As representatives of diverse areas of the nations public health infrastructure, we urge you to support another critical piece of that infrastructure: Title X, the nations only dedicated source of public funding for family planning. These resolutions would overturn an important rule finalized in December 2016 that protects the ability of local communities to develop family planning networks that work best for them. We write in strong opposition to the nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions to serve as United States attorney general. Given his long record of hostility towards reproductive rights and his alignment1 with extreme anti-abortion organizations, we firmly believe that Senator Sessions is not capable of fair and impartial action as attorney general. His long-held bias will negate his ability to oversee Department of Justice obligations to protect without prejudice the constitutional right to abortion, as well as the patients and providers of reproductive health care.

We are writing to express our opposition to the confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of our laws, and its rulings can dramatically impact the lives and rights of all Americans. Judge Gorsuchs decade-long record on the federal bench, as well as his writings, speeches, and activities throughout his career, demonstrate he is a judge with an agenda. His frequent dissents and concurrences show he is out of the mainstream of legal thought and unwilling to accept the constructs of binding precedent and stare decisis when they dictate results he disfavors. If confirmed to the Supreme Court, which is closely divided on many critical issues, Judge Gorsuch would tip the balance in a direction that would undermine many of our core rights and legal protections. He lacks the impartiality and independence the American people expect and deserve from the federal bench. We join together as diverse voices from a variety of sectors to oppose the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by blocking aid to foreign organizations who use their own non-U.S. funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country. We respectfully request that you demonstrate your support for public health by opposing H.J.Res. 43 and S.J.Res. 13. As representatives of diverse areas of the nations public health infrastructure, we urge you to support another critical piece of that infrastructure: Title X, the nations only dedicated source of public funding for family planning. These resolutions would overturn an important rule finalized in December 2016 that protects the ability of local communities to develop family planning networks that work best for them. As members of the Act for Women campaign, we write to thank you for your leadership on the Womens Health Protection Act (S. 217/ H.R. 448). This campaign unites national, state, and local organizations working to support and advance this critical legislation.

As this Congressional session comes to a close, we want to make clear our strong commitment to the Women's Health Protection Act. It is no secret that anti-choice leaders and activists have increasingly sought new ways to undermine womens access to abortion care. Even with the landmark Supreme Court victory this summer in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, many state legislators are still determined to erode, if not eradicate, the promise of Roe v. Wade. Since 2011, states have enacted 334 abortion restrictions, including laws that interfere with the practice of medicine by mandating unnecessary procedures and unconstitutional bans on abortion before viability.



We urge you to actively oppose H.J. Res. 42 when it comes to the floor. This measure would repeal a Department of Labor rule intended to implement a bipartisan agreement on implementing a provision in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 that allows states to drug test unemployment insurance (UI) applicants in certain circumstances. In 2012, Congress approved a bipartisan compromise on drug testing unemployment insurance claimants. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res 83, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. As CEO of CKE Restaurants, his businesses have repeatedly violated the Fair Labor Standards Act, the chief statute which he would be charged with enforcing as Labor Secretary. The Department of Labor has investigated Mr. Puzders restaurants often during his 16 years tenure in that position, and has found violations of wage and hour laws in most of those investigations. He has been an outspoken critic of the very overtime and minimum wage rules which guarantee employees a living wage. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company. We write to express its strong opposition to the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor. ISHV believes it is the ethical obligation of all members of our nationwide community and most especially the Labor Department to accept responsibility for the well-being of society, guaranteeing the right to gainful employment, social security and health care benefits including those of women, racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities. The Secretary of Labor is the nations most senior official tasked with ensuring the well-being and rights of working people and advancing their employment opportunities, and is therefore of great importance to women and their families. Mr. Puzders record is entirely inconsistent with these duties. We submit these comments on the Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, Titled Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. As the interim guidance implements the January 30, 2017 Executive Order, the authority to issue the interim guidance depends on the validity of the Executive Order. In the Executive Order, the President directs federal agencies to identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed for every new existing regulation promulgated. For fiscal year 2017, the Executive Order directs federal agencies to ensure that the total incremental costs from all new and repealed regulations is no greater than $0. For subsequent fiscal years, the Executive Order directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to place a dollar cap on incremental costs allowed for each agency in issuing new and repealing existing regulations. The Interim Guidance is directed at Section 2 of the Executive Order, the provisions that apply to the current fiscal year. We understand that the House will soon consider H.R. 985, the "Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2015." We write to strongly oppose Section 2 of H.R. 985. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. We write to reiterate our strong view that the Department of Labors fiduciary rule, which requires those who give retirement savings advice to put their clients best interest first must be allowed to go into effect as planned in April; and to urge you to ask the nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor, Alex Acosta, to affirm his commitment to the rule being implemented on time. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company.

We write to express our profound concerns about a number of President Trumps recent executive orders and policy statements and their connection to the nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. In his first week in office, President Trump has made extraordinary claims of executive authority, has called for a major investigation into voter fraud, and has outlined numerous policy changes that pose grave dangers to civil liberties and civil rights. Given the reported involvement of Senator Sessions in advising President Trump on some of these matters, we believe you have a profound duty as Chairman and ask that you do everything necessary to ensure that Committee members are fully informed about the role of Senator Sessions in developing these new orders and proposals and his plans to implement and execute them. We are writing to express our views on the factors we urge you to consider in selecting the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. The Department of Justices Civil Rights Division was created by passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and this year marks its 60th anniversary. The Civil Rights Division and its eleven sections have the critical responsibility of enforcing our nations federal civil rights laws. Its mission is to provide equal treatment and equal justice under the law by enforcing and defending the civil rights of all Americans in such areas as voting, criminal justice, education, employment, housing, and public accommodations. Our federal civil rights laws have transformed the nation, outlawing discrimination in nearly every facet of American life. We are writing to express our strong opposition to the confirmation of Senator Jefferson B. Sessions (R-AL) to be the 84th Attorney General of the United States. Senator Sessions has a 30-year record of racial insensitivity, bias against immigrants, disregard for the rule of law, and hostility to the protection of civil rights that makes him unfit to serve as the Attorney General of the United States. In our democracy, the Attorney General is charged with enforcing our nations laws without prejudice and with an eye toward justice. And, just as important, the Attorney General has to be seen by the public - every member of the public, from every community - as a fair arbiter of justice. Unfortunately, there is little in Senator Sessions record, or learned from his confirmation hearing and supporting documents, that demonstrates that he would meet such a standard. We write to remind you in 1986, when then-U.S. Attorney Sessions was nominated by former President Ronald Reagan to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, the Republican-controlled Senate upheld its constitutional duty, undertaking a careful and comprehensive review of his record at that time. The Judiciary Committee was presented with compelling evidence that then-U.S. Attorney Sessions had a deeply troubling record as an opponent of civil rights enforcement, a champion of voter suppression tactics targeting African Americans, and a history of making racially-insensitive statements. This record included warning an African-American colleague to be careful about what he said to white folks, and speaking favorably about the Ku Klux Klan, as well as his prosecution of three African-American voting rights activists on dozens of charges that were promptly rejected by a jury. We are writing to express our opposition tothe confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of our laws, and its rulings can dramatically impact the lives and rights of all Americans. Judge Gorsuchs decade-long record on the federal bench, as well as his writings, speeches, and activities throughout his career, demonstrate he is a judge with an agenda. His frequent dissents and concurrences show he is out of the mainstream of legal thought and unwilling to accept the constructs of binding precedent and stare decisis when they dictate results he disfavors. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write to strongly oppose H.R. 985, the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. In this letter, we highlight the most egregious of its many harms. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC or the Commission) Proposed Enforcement Guidance on Unlawful Harassment (Proposed Enforcement Guidance). Protection against workplace harassment, including sex-based harassment, is key to achieving equal treatment. The undersigned organizations committed to workplace equality have joined to express strong support for the Proposed Enforcement Guidance and believe it will promote the reduction of discrimination and harassment in the workforce. The EEOC last issued policy guidance on harassment in 1999; since then, the law has evolved significantly. One-third of all EEOC charges include an allegation of harassment,1 demonstrating the need for current and robust guidance for employers and EEOC investigators. We write to call on you to recuse yourself from all Department of Justice investigations and actions regarding any interactions between President Donald Trump, his campaign staff or other individuals supporting his campaign and Russian actors during Trumps 2016 presidential campaign, any Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election, the activities of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and Russian actors, and leaks concerning these matters. We are writing to urge that you conduct a thorough review of the prior record of Alex Acosta as you consider his nomination for U.S. Secretary of Labor. As organizations that are committed to advancing the civil and human rights of all workers in America, we believe it is essential for this Committee to scrutinize Mr. Acostas tenure as the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice.

We urge you to actively oppose H.J. Res. 42 when it comes to the floor. This measure would repeal a Department of Labor rule intended to implement a bipartisan agreement on implementing a provision in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 that allows states to drug test unemployment insurance (UI) applicants in certain circumstances. In 2012, Congress approved a bipartisan compromise on drug testing unemployment insurance claimants. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res 83, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We write in strong opposition to H. J. Res. 83/ S.J. Res. 27, a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval that would repeal an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule that clarifies an employers responsibility to maintain accurate records of serious work related injuries and illnesses. This resolution will undermine workplace health and safety in the most dangerous industries. This OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs nor any new obligations to covered employers, nor does it affect small businesses. It simply clarifies OSHAs authority to hold employers accountable for their longstanding obligation to maintain accurate injury records, a requirement that has been in effect since the Nixon Administration. Further, the rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. We ask you to vote against the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor because we do not believe that Mr. Puzder will adequately discharge the primary duty of that post, which is to protect the rights of workers. Grounds for that belief are based on his anti-employee public record. As CEO of CKE Restaurants, his businesses have repeatedly violated the Fair Labor Standards Act, the chief statute which he would be charged with enforcing as Labor Secretary. The Department of Labor has investigated Mr. Puzders restaurants often during his 16 years tenure in that position, and has found violations of wage and hour laws in most of those investigations. He has been an outspoken critic of the very overtime and minimum wage rules which guarantee employees a living wage. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company. We write to express its strong opposition to the confirmation of Andrew Puzder as Secretary of Labor. ISHV believes it is the ethical obligation of all members of our nationwide community and most especially the Labor Department to accept responsibility for the well-being of society, guaranteeing the right to gainful employment, social security and health care benefits including those of women, racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities. The Secretary of Labor is the nations most senior official tasked with ensuring the well-being and rights of working people and advancing their employment opportunities, and is therefore of great importance to women and their families. Mr. Puzders record is entirely inconsistent with these duties. We submit these comments on the Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, Titled Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. As the interim guidance implements the January 30, 2017 Executive Order, the authority to issue the interim guidance depends on the validity of the Executive Order. In the Executive Order, the President directs federal agencies to identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed for every new existing regulation promulgated. For fiscal year 2017, the Executive Order directs federal agencies to ensure that the total incremental costs from all new and repealed regulations is no greater than $0. For subsequent fiscal years, the Executive Order directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to place a dollar cap on incremental costs allowed for each agency in issuing new and repealing existing regulations. The Interim Guidance is directed at Section 2 of the Executive Order, the provisions that apply to the current fiscal year. We understand that the House will soon consider H.R. 985, the "Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2015." We write to strongly oppose Section 2 of H.R. 985. The bill will undermine the enforcement of this nations civil rights laws and upend decades of settled class action law. This sweeping and poorly drafted legislation will create needless chaos in the courts without actually solving any demonstrated problem. We write to reiterate our strong view that the Department of Labors fiduciary rule, which requires those who give retirement savings advice to put their clients best interest first must be allowed to go into effect as planned in April; and to urge you to ask the nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor, Alex Acosta, to affirm his commitment to the rule being implemented on time. We write to respectfully request that you allow members of the HELP Committee as much time as they need to question Andrew Puzder fully during his confirmation hearing, by permitting more than one round of questions from Committee members. We also request that you allow present and former employees of CKE Restaurants to testify as to the working conditions in Mr. Puzders company.

We write to voice our strong opposition to the sweeping language in Section 1094 of the House version (H.R. 4909) of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2017 (NDAA). That provision would authorize taxpayer-funded discrimination in each and every federal contract and grant. We urge the conferees to reject this provision during negotiations on the conference report. Notably, a bipartisan group of four Republicans and six Democrats-led by Representatives Charlie Dent and Adam Smith-submitted an amendment to the House Rules Committee to strip Section 1094 from the House NDAA bill, but the Committee prevented the full House from voting on their amendment. The Senate bill (S. 2943) does not contain such a provision. We oppose the Conscience Protection Act (S. 304) and urge you to vote NO when the bill comes to the House floor, expected on Wednesday, July 13. The Conscience Protection Act would allow employers, insurance companies, and hospitals to discriminate against women seeking reproductive health care, seriously undermining womens ability to obtain safe, legal abortion care. The Conscience Protection Act would significantly expand and make permanent the so-called Weldon Amendment, an annual appropriations rider that is intended to restrict womens access to abortion care. July 12 will mark the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. In the month since, Congress has not held a single hearing on the needs of the victims, their families, and survivors, or on ways to better protect the LGBT community from bias-motivated violence or discrimination. We are deeply disappointed to learn that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform plans to hold a hearing on a discriminatory, anti-LGBT bill known as the First Amendment Defense Act (H.R. 2802) on the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. We write to urge you to cancel this hearing.

Re: Proposed Department of Labor (Wage and Hour Division) Rule on Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors (RIN 1235-AA13) Dear Mr. Waterman, We writes to express its support for the U.S. Department of Labors (DOLs) proposed rule implementing Executive Order 13706, Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors (the EO or the Order). As an organization dedicated to [FILL IN], we are committed to ensuring that working families have the job and economic security that paid sick days provide and recognizing the benefits to contractors, the government, taxpayers and the economy. Via online submission RE: RIN 1291-AA36 - Implementation of the Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity Provisions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Dear Ms. Barry-Perez: We write to express our strong support for the Department of Labors (DOL) proposal to update the nondiscrimination and equal opportunity regulations implementing Section 188 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) to align with current law and address its application to current workforce issues. This rule has the potential to increase womens, LGBT persons, and other underrepresented groups access to services, benefits, training, programs, and employment in and through the workforce development system. It also has the potential to ensure that workforce development programs help end-not reinforce-occupational gender segregation and the gender pay gap. We urge you to co-sponsor the Workplace Action for a Growing Economy (WAGE) Act (S. 2042/H.R. 3514). Introduced by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) and Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA), this important legislation would amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by strengthening protections for working people who organize and promote change through collective action. The WAGE Act would increase protections for all working people and will help open up pathways to equal pay, increased safety in the workplace, and higher wages. The very best way to raise wages and turn the tide back in favor of working people is to protect and strengthen their right to speak out together. We applaud Senator Murray and Representative Scott for their work on this legislation, and urge you to co-sponsor it. Re: Proposed Revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1), FR Docket Number 2016-01544, Docket ID EEOC-2016-0002 Dear Ms. Wilson: ISHV supports the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC) proposed revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1) to collect pay data from employers. Collecting compensation data through the proposed revision of the EEO-1 will promote the critically important goals of identifying pay discrimination, improving enforcement of pay discrimination laws, and increasing voluntary employer compliance with those laws. Use of a modified version of an existing collection mechanism will also improve coordination between EEOC and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) of the Department of Labor, and avoid costly or burdensome duplication of efforts. We also offer some suggestions for strengthening the proposed revision to ensure achievement of these goals. Support for The Pay Stub Transparency Act Dear Congressman Scott: The undersigned organizations write in enthusiastic support for H.R. 4376, The Pay Stub Transparency Act, which you introduced on January 13, 2016. As you know, wage theft is an epidemic that costs mostly low-wage workers tens of billions of dollars each year in unpaid wages. The legal tools they have at their disposal, be it thinly-resourced departments of labor or private lawsuits, are not available to far too many workers seeking to be properly paid for all of their work. The Pay Stub Transparency Act is an important weapon in the fight against wage theft. As an organization dedicated to eliminating sex discrimination in the workplace and promoting policies that benefit women and working families, we urge you to support the Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2016 (Restoring Statutory Rights Act), introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). The Restoring Statutory Rights Act would restore the rights of workers to pursue their state and federal law claims and obtain remedies in court rather than forcing arbitration of their claims. For women and all workers, access to courts is critically important to pursue remedies of civil rights violations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and family and medical leave claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. The practice of forced arbitration is widespread and damaging. The Honorable Shaun Donovan Director OMB We write to express our support for the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order and to urge you to release the final rule as soon as possible. We are an organization dedicated to eradicating all forms of discrimination in the workplace and promoting good jobs for women. This executive order is the latest in a series of important steps the President has taken to bring the federal contractor community closer to achieving these goals. Employers that have the privilege of doing business with the federal government also have a responsibility to abide by the law. This executive order is crucial to the communities we represent because it helps ensure that federal contractors behave responsibly and ethically with respect to labor standards, civil rights laws and more. The executive order will ensure that companies applying for federal contracts have every incentive to comply with federal labor and employment laws, including for example the Fair Labor Standards Act (which includes the Equal Pay Act), Title VII, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and their state law equivalents. This will lead to fairer treatment for workers in the federal contractor workforce and raise awareness among other employers about their legal obligations. The executive order will also ban compulsory arbitration of claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which is critical to ensuring that workers can have their day in court. Re: RIN 1205-AB59-Proposed Rulemaking on Apprenticeship Programs; Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations Dear Ms. Gagliardi: We write to express our strong support for the U.S. Department of Labors (DOL) proposal to update the Apprenticeship Programs Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) regulations after nearly forty years. This rulemaking has the ability to significantly impact the participation of women and other underrepresented groups in apprenticeship and the future of these groups in the trades. In the almost four decades since the EEO regulations were last updated, the representation of women in apprenticeships has remained stagnant. While women make up 47% of the workforce, they account for only 6.3% of apprentices. Persistent barriers to entry and advancement of women in these programs lead to this underrepresentation.

Re: Proposed Department of Labor (Wage and Hour Division) Rule on Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors (RIN 1235-AA13) Dear Mr. Waterman, We writes to express its support for the U.S. Department of Labors (DOLs) proposed rule implementing Executive Order 13706, Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors (the EO or the Order). As an organization dedicated to [FILL IN], we are committed to ensuring that working families have the job and economic security that paid sick days provide and recognizing the benefits to contractors, the government, taxpayers and the economy. Via online submission RE: RIN 1291-AA36 - Implementation of the Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity Provisions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Dear Ms. Barry-Perez: We write to express our strong support for the Department of Labors (DOL) proposal to update the nondiscrimination and equal opportunity regulations implementing Section 188 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) to align with current law and address its application to current workforce issues. This rule has the potential to increase womens, LGBT persons, and other underrepresented groups access to services, benefits, training, programs, and employment in and through the workforce development system. It also has the potential to ensure that workforce development programs help end-not reinforce-occupational gender segregation and the gender pay gap. We urge you to co-sponsor the Workplace Action for a Growing Economy (WAGE) Act (S. 2042/H.R. 3514). Introduced by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) and Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA), this important legislation would amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by strengthening protections for working people who organize and promote change through collective action. The WAGE Act would increase protections for all working people and will help open up pathways to equal pay, increased safety in the workplace, and higher wages. The very best way to raise wages and turn the tide back in favor of working people is to protect and strengthen their right to speak out together. We applaud Senator Murray and Representative Scott for their work on this legislation, and urge you to co-sponsor it. Re: Proposed Revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1), FR Docket Number 2016-01544, Docket ID EEOC-2016-0002 Dear Ms. Wilson: ISHV supports the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC) proposed revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1) to collect pay data from employers. Collecting compensation data through the proposed revision of the EEO-1 will promote the critically important goals of identifying pay discrimination, improving enforcement of pay discrimination laws, and increasing voluntary employer compliance with those laws. Use of a modified version of an existing collection mechanism will also improve coordination between EEOC and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) of the Department of Labor, and avoid costly or burdensome duplication of efforts. We also offer some suggestions for strengthening the proposed revision to ensure achievement of these goals. Support for The Pay Stub Transparency Act Dear Congressman Scott: The undersigned organizations write in enthusiastic support for H.R. 4376, The Pay Stub Transparency Act, which you introduced on January 13, 2016. As you know, wage theft is an epidemic that costs mostly low-wage workers tens of billions of dollars each year in unpaid wages. The legal tools they have at their disposal, be it thinly-resourced departments of labor or private lawsuits, are not available to far too many workers seeking to be properly paid for all of their work. The Pay Stub Transparency Act is an important weapon in the fight against wage theft. As an organization dedicated to eliminating sex discrimination in the workplace and promoting policies that benefit women and working families, we urge you to support the Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2016 (Restoring Statutory Rights Act), introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). The Restoring Statutory Rights Act would restore the rights of workers to pursue their state and federal law claims and obtain remedies in court rather than forcing arbitration of their claims. For women and all workers, access to courts is critically important to pursue remedies of civil rights violations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and family and medical leave claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. The practice of forced arbitration is widespread and damaging. The Honorable Shaun Donovan Director OMB We write to express our support for the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order and to urge you to release the final rule as soon as possible. We are an organization dedicated to eradicating all forms of discrimination in the workplace and promoting good jobs for women. This executive order is the latest in a series of important steps the President has taken to bring the federal contractor community closer to achieving these goals. Employers that have the privilege of doing business with the federal government also have a responsibility to abide by the law. This executive order is crucial to the communities we represent because it helps ensure that federal contractors behave responsibly and ethically with respect to labor standards, civil rights laws and more. The executive order will ensure that companies applying for federal contracts have every incentive to comply with federal labor and employment laws, including for example the Fair Labor Standards Act (which includes the Equal Pay Act), Title VII, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and their state law equivalents. This will lead to fairer treatment for workers in the federal contractor workforce and raise awareness among other employers about their legal obligations. The executive order will also ban compulsory arbitration of claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which is critical to ensuring that workers can have their day in court. Re: RIN 1205-AB59-Proposed Rulemaking on Apprenticeship Programs; Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations Dear Ms. Gagliardi: We write to express our strong support for the U.S. Department of Labors (DOL) proposal to update the Apprenticeship Programs Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) regulations after nearly forty years. This rulemaking has the ability to significantly impact the participation of women and other underrepresented groups in apprenticeship and the future of these groups in the trades. In the almost four decades since the EEO regulations were last updated, the representation of women in apprenticeships has remained stagnant. While women make up 47% of the workforce, they account for only 6.3% of apprentices. Persistent barriers to entry and advancement of women in these programs lead to this underrepresentation.

We write to voice our strong opposition to the sweeping language in Section 1094 of the House version (H.R. 4909) of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2017 (NDAA). That provision would authorize taxpayer-funded discrimination in each and every federal contract and grant. We urge the conferees to reject this provision during negotiations on the conference report. Notably, a bipartisan group of four Republicans and six Democrats-led by Representatives Charlie Dent and Adam Smith-submitted an amendment to the House Rules Committee to strip Section 1094 from the House NDAA bill, but the Committee prevented the full House from voting on their amendment. The Senate bill (S. 2943) does not contain such a provision. We oppose the Conscience Protection Act (S. 304) and urge you to vote NO when the bill comes to the House floor, expected on Wednesday, July 13. The Conscience Protection Act would allow employers, insurance companies, and hospitals to discriminate against women seeking reproductive health care, seriously undermining womens ability to obtain safe, legal abortion care. The Conscience Protection Act would significantly expand and make permanent the so-called Weldon Amendment, an annual appropriations rider that is intended to restrict womens access to abortion care. July 12 will mark the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. In the month since, Congress has not held a single hearing on the needs of the victims, their families, and survivors, or on ways to better protect the LGBT community from bias-motivated violence or discrimination. We are deeply disappointed to learn that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform plans to hold a hearing on a discriminatory, anti-LGBT bill known as the First Amendment Defense Act (H.R. 2802) on the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. We write to urge you to cancel this hearing.

We write to express our support for the Pay Equity for All Act (H.R. 6030) and urge you to become a cosponsor. This bill provides an important solution to address the pervasive pay gap that women and people of color experience; it would prohibit employers from relying on the salary history of prospective employees when making hiring and pay decisions. Youve heard that on average women typically make just 80 cents on the male dollar; its even worse for moms and women of color. The gender pay gap is a real problem that deserves targeted solutions. The Pay Equity for All Act provides one of those solutions. The bill would protect job seekers from having to disclose their salary history in order to be interviewed, to be considered for a job offer, or as a condition of employment, and from being retaliated against for refusing to disclose their prior salary. In turn, the bill encourages employers to pay employees based on job requirements and prior experience, rather than arbitrary prior wages. The Institute for Science and Human Values supports the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC) proposed revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1) to collect pay data from private employers and federal contractors. As an organization dedicated to the well-being of society, guaranteeing various rights, including those of women, racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities; and supporting education, health care, gainful employment, and other social benefits, we are committed to workplace equality and equal pay for equal work. The proposed collection of pay data will be critically important in helping to identify compensation discrimination and improving enforcement of pay discrimination laws, and will benefit businesses, individual workers, and the economy.

Re: Proposed Department of Labor (Wage and Hour Division) Rule on Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors (RIN 1235-AA13) Dear Mr. Waterman, We writes to express its support for the U.S. Department of Labors (DOLs) proposed rule implementing Executive Order 13706, Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors (the EO or the Order). As an organization dedicated to [FILL IN], we are committed to ensuring that working families have the job and economic security that paid sick days provide and recognizing the benefits to contractors, the government, taxpayers and the economy. Via online submission RE: RIN 1291-AA36 - Implementation of the Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity Provisions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Dear Ms. Barry-Perez: We write to express our strong support for the Department of Labors (DOL) proposal to update the nondiscrimination and equal opportunity regulations implementing Section 188 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) to align with current law and address its application to current workforce issues. This rule has the potential to increase womens, LGBT persons, and other underrepresented groups access to services, benefits, training, programs, and employment in and through the workforce development system. It also has the potential to ensure that workforce development programs help end-not reinforce-occupational gender segregation and the gender pay gap. We urge you to co-sponsor the Workplace Action for a Growing Economy (WAGE) Act (S. 2042/H.R. 3514). Introduced by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) and Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA), this important legislation would amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by strengthening protections for working people who organize and promote change through collective action. The WAGE Act would increase protections for all working people and will help open up pathways to equal pay, increased safety in the workplace, and higher wages. The very best way to raise wages and turn the tide back in favor of working people is to protect and strengthen their right to speak out together. We applaud Senator Murray and Representative Scott for their work on this legislation, and urge you to co-sponsor it. Re: Proposed Revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1), FR Docket Number 2016-01544, Docket ID EEOC-2016-0002 Dear Ms. Wilson: ISHV supports the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC) proposed revision of the Employer Information Report (EEO-1) to collect pay data from employers. Collecting compensation data through the proposed revision of the EEO-1 will promote the critically important goals of identifying pay discrimination, improving enforcement of pay discrimination laws, and increasing voluntary employer compliance with those laws. Use of a modified version of an existing collection mechanism will also improve coordination between EEOC and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) of the Department of Labor, and avoid costly or burdensome duplication of efforts. We also offer some suggestions for strengthening the proposed revision to ensure achievement of these goals. Support for The Pay Stub Transparency Act Dear Congressman Scott: The undersigned organizations write in enthusiastic support for H.R. 4376, The Pay Stub Transparency Act, which you introduced on January 13, 2016. As you know, wage theft is an epidemic that costs mostly low-wage workers tens of billions of dollars each year in unpaid wages. The legal tools they have at their disposal, be it thinly-resourced departments of labor or private lawsuits, are not available to far too many workers seeking to be properly paid for all of their work. The Pay Stub Transparency Act is an important weapon in the fight against wage theft. As an organization dedicated to eliminating sex discrimination in the workplace and promoting policies that benefit women and working families, we urge you to support the Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2016 (Restoring Statutory Rights Act), introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). The Restoring Statutory Rights Act would restore the rights of workers to pursue their state and federal law claims and obtain remedies in court rather than forcing arbitration of their claims. For women and all workers, access to courts is critically important to pursue remedies of civil rights violations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and family and medical leave claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. The practice of forced arbitration is widespread and damaging. The Honorable Shaun Donovan Director OMB We write to express our support for the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order and to urge you to release the final rule as soon as possible. We are an organization dedicated to eradicating all forms of discrimination in the workplace and promoting good jobs for women. This executive order is the latest in a series of important steps the President has taken to bring the federal contractor community closer to achieving these goals. Employers that have the privilege of doing business with the federal government also have a responsibility to abide by the law. This executive order is crucial to the communities we represent because it helps ensure that federal contractors behave responsibly and ethically with respect to labor standards, civil rights laws and more. The executive order will ensure that companies applying for federal contracts have every incentive to comply with federal labor and employment laws, including for example the Fair Labor Standards Act (which includes the Equal Pay Act), Title VII, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and their state law equivalents. This will lead to fairer treatment for workers in the federal contractor workforce and raise awareness among other employers about their legal obligations. The executive order will also ban compulsory arbitration of claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which is critical to ensuring that workers can have their day in court. Re: RIN 1205-AB59-Proposed Rulemaking on Apprenticeship Programs; Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations Dear Ms. Gagliardi: We write to express our strong support for the U.S. Department of Labors (DOL) proposal to update the Apprenticeship Programs Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) regulations after nearly forty years. This rulemaking has the ability to significantly impact the participation of women and other underrepresented groups in apprenticeship and the future of these groups in the trades. In the almost four decades since the EEO regulations were last updated, the representation of women in apprenticeships has remained stagnant. While women make up 47% of the workforce, they account for only 6.3% of apprentices. Persistent barriers to entry and advancement of women in these programs lead to this underrepresentation.

We write to voice opposition to reauthorizing the District of Columbia private school voucher program as part of the FY 2016 Omnibus Appropriations bill. We oppose this and all private school voucher programs because public funds should be spent on public schools, not private schools. But the D.C. program, in particular, has proven ineffective and unaccountable to taxpayers. Not only have multiple Department of Education (USED) studies1 concluded that the program has failed to improve educational outcomes for participating students, but two U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports have also identified its repeated management and accountability failures. We submit this letter for the hearing "Expanding Educational Opportunity through School Choice to express our strong opposition to private school vouchers. Vouchers divert desperately-needed resources away from the public school system to fund the education of a few, select students, with limited, if any, real impact on student academic achievement. Instead of providing equal access to high quality education or setting high standards for accountability, voucher programs have proven ineffective, lack accountability to taxpayers, and deprive students of rights provided to public school students. Congress would better serve all children by using funds to make public schools stronger and safer than by creating a new voucher program. We are dedicated to the health and welfare of our nations youth, we respectfully request your support for the requests below during the fiscal year (FY) 2017 funding deliberations. As organizations committed to supporting adolescent sexual health programs-the Office of Adolescent Healths (OAH) Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (TPPP) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Division of Adolescent School Health (DASH)-we know firsthand the vital role these federal programs play in supporting the health of young people and communities. Re: NCPE Opposes S. 2711, the Native American Education Opportunity Act Dear Chairman Barrasso and Vice Chairman Tester: We submit this letter for the hearing on S. 2711, the Native American Education Opportunity Act, to express our strong opposition to private school vouchers in the form of Education Savings Accounts (ESAs). ESAs are effectively no different than vouchers; they place funding that would ordinarily support students attending public schools into an account for students to use on other education expenses, including private school tuition. Like vouchers, ESAs divert desperately-needed federal resources away from the primary school system students attend to fund the education of a few, select students in alternative settings. Furthermore, voucher and ESA programs lack accountability, do not improve educational outcomes of students, strip students of rights, and do real harm to the public school systems that educate the majority of students in a state or district.1 At a time when schools serving American Indian students are desperately in need of funding,2 Congress would better serve all American Indian students by using federal funds to make schools serving American Indian students stronger and safer than by allowing funds to flow to a separate voucher program.

We submit this letter for the markup of S. 2711, the Native American Education Opportunity Act, to express our strong opposition to private school vouchers in the form of Education Savings Accounts (ESAs). ESAs are effectively no different than vouchers; they place funding that would ordinarily support students attending public schools into an account for students to use on other education expenses, including private school tuition. Like vouchers, ESAs divert desperately-needed federal resources away from the primary school system students attend to fund the education of a few, select students in alternative settings. Furthermore, voucher and ESA programs lack accountability, do not improve educational outcomes of students, strip students of rights, and do real harm to the public school systems that educate the majority of students in a state or district.1 At a time when schools serving American Indian students are desperately in need of funding,2 Congress would better serve all American Indian students by using federal funds to make schools serving American Indian students stronger and safer than by allowing funds to flow to a separate voucher program.

We write to voice our strong opposition to the sweeping language in Section 1094 of the House version (H.R. 4909) of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2017 (NDAA). That provision would authorize taxpayer-funded discrimination in each and every federal contract and grant. We urge the conferees to reject this provision during negotiations on the conference report. Notably, a bipartisan group of four Republicans and six Democrats-led by Representatives Charlie Dent and Adam Smith-submitted an amendment to the House Rules Committee to strip Section 1094 from the House NDAA bill, but the Committee prevented the full House from voting on their amendment. The Senate bill (S. 2943) does not contain such a provision. We oppose the Conscience Protection Act (S. 304) and urge you to vote NO when the bill comes to the House floor, expected on Wednesday, July 13. The Conscience Protection Act would allow employers, insurance companies, and hospitals to discriminate against women seeking reproductive health care, seriously undermining womens ability to obtain safe, legal abortion care. The Conscience Protection Act would significantly expand and make permanent the so-called Weldon Amendment, an annual appropriations rider that is intended to restrict womens access to abortion care. July 12 will mark the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. In the month since, Congress has not held a single hearing on the needs of the victims, their families, and survivors, or on ways to better protect the LGBT community from bias-motivated violence or discrimination. We are deeply disappointed to learn that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform plans to hold a hearing on a discriminatory, anti-LGBT bill known as the First Amendment Defense Act (H.R. 2802) on the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. We write to urge you to cancel this hearing.

We write to voice our strong opposition to the sweeping language in Section 1094 of the House version (H.R. 4909) of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2017 (NDAA). That provision would authorize taxpayer-funded discrimination in each and every federal contract and grant. We urge the conferees to reject this provision during negotiations on the conference report. Notably, a bipartisan group of four Republicans and six Democrats-led by Representatives Charlie Dent and Adam Smith-submitted an amendment to the House Rules Committee to strip Section 1094 from the House NDAA bill, but the Committee prevented the full House from voting on their amendment. The Senate bill (S. 2943) does not contain such a provision. We oppose the Conscience Protection Act (S. 304) and urge you to vote NO when the bill comes to the House floor, expected on Wednesday, July 13. The Conscience Protection Act would allow employers, insurance companies, and hospitals to discriminate against women seeking reproductive health care, seriously undermining womens ability to obtain safe, legal abortion care. The Conscience Protection Act would significantly expand and make permanent the so-called Weldon Amendment, an annual appropriations rider that is intended to restrict womens access to abortion care. July 12 will mark the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. In the month since, Congress has not held a single hearing on the needs of the victims, their families, and survivors, or on ways to better protect the LGBT community from bias-motivated violence or discrimination. We are deeply disappointed to learn that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform plans to hold a hearing on a discriminatory, anti-LGBT bill known as the First Amendment Defense Act (H.R. 2802) on the one-month anniversary of this tragedy. We write to urge you to cancel this hearing.

We Oppose Private School Vouchers in the Every Child Achieves Act (Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) We write to express our strong opposition to the inclusion of any provision in the Every Child Achieves Act that would create or lead to a private school voucher, including language that would make Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to that childs public or private school. Title I Portability Is a Stepping-Stone to Vouchers We are concerned that Title I portability, even when limited to public schools, is a stepping-stone for an expansion of vouchers for private and religious schools using either federal or state funds, which our organizations vehemently oppose. We stand in strong opposition to the addition of any provision to legislation to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that would interfere in the relationship between students and health care providers by limiting access to information or health care services. On February 26th, 2015, during consideration of H.R. 5, the Student Success Act, a politically motivated amendment was added to the Managers Amendment that would do just that. We voice opposition to the reauthorization of the District of Columbia private school voucher program. We oppose this and all private school voucher programs because public funds should be spent on public schools, not private schools. But the D.C. program, in particular, has proven ineffective and unaccountable to taxpayers. We urge you to reject any and all congressional efforts, including resolutions of disapproval, that would prevent two D.C. civil rights bills from taking effect. The D.C. Council unanimously passed both the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 (RHNDAA) and the Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014 (HRAA) to support one basic underlying principle: fairness. We write to urge you to oppose H.J. Res 43, the resolution of disapproval to block the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act (RHNDA), which was adopted by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and may reach the House floor this week. We are also strongly opposed to H.J. Res. 44, which would block the Human Rights Amendment Act (HRAA). The RHNDA and the HRAA are local anti-discrimination bills that would guarantee basic fairness for people who work and study in D.C., and Congress should not interfere through these resolutions or any other means.

We Oppose Private School Vouchers in the Every Child Achieves Act (Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) We write to express our strong opposition to the inclusion of any provision in the Every Child Achieves Act that would create or lead to a private school voucher, including language that would make Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to that childs public or private school. Title I Portability Is a Stepping-Stone to Vouchers We are concerned that Title I portability, even when limited to public schools, is a stepping-stone for an expansion of vouchers for private and religious schools using either federal or state funds, which our organizations vehemently oppose. We stand in strong opposition to the addition of any provision to legislation to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that would interfere in the relationship between students and health care providers by limiting access to information or health care services. On February 26th, 2015, during consideration of H.R. 5, the Student Success Act, a politically motivated amendment was added to the Managers Amendment that would do just that. We voice opposition to the reauthorization of the District of Columbia private school voucher program. We oppose this and all private school voucher programs because public funds should be spent on public schools, not private schools. But the D.C. program, in particular, has proven ineffective and unaccountable to taxpayers. We urge you to reject any and all congressional efforts, including resolutions of disapproval, that would prevent two D.C. civil rights bills from taking effect. The D.C. Council unanimously passed both the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 (RHNDAA) and the Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014 (HRAA) to support one basic underlying principle: fairness. We write to urge you to oppose H.J. Res 43, the resolution of disapproval to block the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act (RHNDA), which was adopted by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and may reach the House floor this week. We are also strongly opposed to H.J. Res. 44, which would block the Human Rights Amendment Act (HRAA). The RHNDA and the HRAA are local anti-discrimination bills that would guarantee basic fairness for people who work and study in D.C., and Congress should not interfere through these resolutions or any other means.

We write to voice opposition to H.R. 10, the reauthorization of the District of Columbia private school voucher program. We oppose this and all private school voucher programs because public funds should be spent on public schools, not private schools. But the D.C. program, in particular, has proven ineffective and unaccountable to taxpayers. Not only have multiple Department of Education (USED) studies concluded that the program has failed to improve educational outcomes for participating students, but two U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports have also identified its repeated management and accountability failures.

We write to voice opposition to H.R. 10, the reauthorization of the District of Columbia private school voucher program. We oppose this and all private school voucher programs because public funds should be spent on public schools, not private schools. But the D.C. program, in particular, has proven ineffective and unaccountable to taxpayers. Not only have multiple Department of Education (USED) studies concluded that the program has failed to improve educational outcomes for participating students, but two U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports have also identified its repeated management and accountability failures.

We write to express our opposition to the Workplace Advancement Act (S. 2200). This inadequate bill suggests that there is just one solution to address the gender pay gap: a very weak non-retaliation provision that is so narrowly drawn it would do more harm than good. In addition, the bill includes a sense of the Congress that recommits to the legal principles previously passed in the Equal Pay Act of 1963, a law that no longer has the teeth necessary to make meaningful strides in closing the gender pay gap. Dear Member of Congress, On behalf of tens of millions of working families we urge you to become a co-sponsor of the Family And Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act (S. 786/H.R. 1439). The FAMILY Act would create a national family and medical leave insurance program that would strengthen the workforce, families, businesses and our economy. The FAMILY Act is modeled on successful and effective state paid leave laws and would help working women and men meet their caregiving demands while reducing economic inequality and improving economic opportunities for all.

We write to express our opposition to the Workplace Advancement Act (S. 2200). This inadequate bill suggests that there is just one solution to address the gender pay gap: a very weak non-retaliation provision that is so narrowly drawn it would do more harm than good. In addition, the bill includes a sense of the Congress that recommits to the legal principles previously passed in the Equal Pay Act of 1963, a law that no longer has the teeth necessary to make meaningful strides in closing the gender pay gap. Dear Member of Congress, On behalf of tens of millions of working families we urge you to become a co-sponsor of the Family And Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act (S. 786/H.R. 1439). The FAMILY Act would create a national family and medical leave insurance program that would strengthen the workforce, families, businesses and our economy. The FAMILY Act is modeled on successful and effective state paid leave laws and would help working women and men meet their caregiving demands while reducing economic inequality and improving economic opportunities for all.

S. 1553 is unconstitutional. S. 1553 violates established constitutional standards by imposing a pre-viability abortion ban. Furthermore, the bills failure to include a health exception also violate the constitutional standards. Oppose any effort to reinstate the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by preventing foreign organizations using their own funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country from receiving U.S. international family planning assistance. Co-Sponsor the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (H.R. 2654/ S. 1512) We are committed to promoting the health and economic security of our nations families, we urge you to support the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (H.R. 2654/ S. 1512). This legislation promotes healthy pregnancies and economic security for pregnant women and their families and strengthens the economy.

We support the Healthy Families Act, a common sense bill that would allow workers to earn up to seven paid sick days a year to recover from short-term illnesses like the flu, access preventive care, care for a sick family member or seek assistance related to domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking. Without paid sick days, workers are forced to make impossible choices when illness strikes. We write to you as organizations strongly opposed to H.R. 36, an unconstitutional and dangerous limitation on abortion that puts womens health and rights at risk. The bill is expected on the House floor this week and, if enacted, would impose a nationwide ban on abortions at twenty weeks with only two inadequate and extremely narrow exceptions. TheInstitute for Science and Human Values (ISHV) since its founding in 2010 has been requesting each year that you become a co-sponsor and fight for the passage of legislation, the Paycheck Fairness Act, to empower women's economic security. If you have done so in the past, thank you. We are asking you to please co-sponsor this year. If you have not co-sponsored before, please be advised American women are depending on you to step up and do so this year. We oppose any effort to reinstate the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by preventing foreign organizations using their own funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country from receiving U.S. international family planning assistance. The global gag rule causes serious harm in countries around the world. The policy interferes with the doctor-patient relationship by restricting medical information healthcare providers may offer, limits free speech by prohibiting local citizens from participating in public policy debates, and impedes womens access to family planning by cutting off funding for many of the most experienced health care providers who have chosen to prioritize quality reproductive-health services and counseling over funding that restricts care and censors information.

House/Senate We write in support of the Womens Health Protection Act of 2015. Despite the clear constitutional rights established more than four decades ago in the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, each year politicians across the country pass harmful restrictions in an effort to roll back a womans right to make the best health care decisions for herself and her family. House/Senate We are committed to protecting and improving womens health and rights, we write in support of the Access to Contraception for Women Servicemembers and Dependents Act of 2015. This bill ensures that all servicemembers and their dependents who rely on the military for health care have comprehensive contraceptive coverage and family planning counseling. House We write to you as organizations strongly opposed to H.R. 36, an unconstitutional and dangerous limitation on abortion that puts womens health and rights at risk. If it were to pass, H.R. 36 would impose a nationwide ban on abortions at twenty weeks with only two inadequate and extremely narrow exceptions. H.R. 36 would make it harder for every woman across the country who needs an abortion and is already facing difficult circumstances. There are many reasons why a woman may need an abortion and-as with any medical care-there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Because each situation is different, we should not deny a woman the ability to make her own decisions in consultation with those she trusts the most. The very purpose of H.R. 36 is to deny women this dignity and right.

Oppose Any Amendment to S. Con. Res. 11 that Would Create a Private School Voucher Program We write to express our strong opposition to any amendments to the Fiscal 2016 Senate Budget Resolution (S. Con Res. 11) that would support the creation of a private school voucher or tuition tax credit program. Rather than providing equal access to high quality education, setting high standards and ensuring accountability for all students, these programs have proven ineffective, lack accountability to taxpayers, deprive students of rights provided to public school students, and threaten religious liberty. We oppose the portability provision in the discussion draft of the Every Child Ready for College or Career Act of 2015 We write to express our strong opposition to inclusion of the provision in the Every Child Ready for College or Career Act of 2015 that would dismantle the Title I funding formula. The current draft would provide states the option of making Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to a public school. This proposal would undermine Title Is fundamental purpose of assisting public schools with high concentrations of poverty and high-need students. Furthermore, Title I portability-even when limited to public schools-is a stepping-stone to private school vouchers. Re: We Oppose Title I Portability in H.R. 5, the Student Success Act of 2015 We write to express our strong opposition to the inclusion of any provision in the Student Success Act that would create or lead to a private school voucher. Our opposition extends to the language included in the bill that would make Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to that childs public school. The portability provision undermines Title Is fundamental purpose of assisting public schools with high concentrations of poverty and high-need students and serves as a stepping-stone to private school vouchers. House/Senate We are dedicated to the health and welfare of our nations youth, we respectfully request your support for the adolescent sexual health promotion programs below during the fiscal year (FY) 2016 funding deliberations. These proven-effective programs provide young people, specifically those most vulnerable and marginalized, with the information they need to make healthy and safe decisions and prevent unintended pregnancy, HIV, and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) throughout their lives. We urge you to fund the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative (TPPI) at $130 million, an additional $6.8 million for evaluation of innovative approaches; fund the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions (CDCs) Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) at $50 million to include at least $3 million for evaluation of school-based HIV prevention; and eliminate funding for the Competitive Abstinence Education (CAE) grant program in the final FY 2016 appropriations. Providing robust funding for TPPI and DASH will help educate and equip young people to make responsible decisions that are vital to their health and well-being and ultimately, the health of our nation.

We Oppose Private School Vouchers in the Every Child Achieves Act (Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) We write to express our strong opposition to the inclusion of any provision in the Every Child Achieves Act that would create or lead to a private school voucher, including language that would make Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to that childs public or private school. Title I Portability Is a Stepping-Stone to Vouchers We are concerned that Title I portability, even when limited to public schools, is a stepping-stone for an expansion of vouchers for private and religious schools using either federal or state funds, which our organizations vehemently oppose. We stand in strong opposition to the addition of any provision to legislation to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that would interfere in the relationship between students and health care providers by limiting access to information or health care services. On February 26th, 2015, during consideration of H.R. 5, the Student Success Act, a politically motivated amendment was added to the Managers Amendment that would do just that. We voice opposition to the reauthorization of the District of Columbia private school voucher program. We oppose this and all private school voucher programs because public funds should be spent on public schools, not private schools. But the D.C. program, in particular, has proven ineffective and unaccountable to taxpayers. We urge you to reject any and all congressional efforts, including resolutions of disapproval, that would prevent two D.C. civil rights bills from taking effect. The D.C. Council unanimously passed both the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 (RHNDAA) and the Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014 (HRAA) to support one basic underlying principle: fairness. We write to urge you to oppose H.J. Res 43, the resolution of disapproval to block the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act (RHNDA), which was adopted by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and may reach the House floor this week. We are also strongly opposed to H.J. Res. 44, which would block the Human Rights Amendment Act (HRAA). The RHNDA and the HRAA are local anti-discrimination bills that would guarantee basic fairness for people who work and study in D.C., and Congress should not interfere through these resolutions or any other means.

S. 1553 is unconstitutional. S. 1553 violates established constitutional standards by imposing a pre-viability abortion ban. Furthermore, the bills failure to include a health exception also violate the constitutional standards. Oppose any effort to reinstate the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by preventing foreign organizations using their own funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country from receiving U.S. international family planning assistance. Co-Sponsor the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (H.R. 2654/ S. 1512) We are committed to promoting the health and economic security of our nations families, we urge you to support the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (H.R. 2654/ S. 1512). This legislation promotes healthy pregnancies and economic security for pregnant women and their families and strengthens the economy.

S. 1553 is unconstitutional. S. 1553 violates established constitutional standards by imposing a pre-viability abortion ban. Furthermore, the bills failure to include a health exception also violate the constitutional standards. Oppose any effort to reinstate the harmful global gag rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy. While the Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortions as a method of family planning, the global gag rule goes a step further by preventing foreign organizations using their own funds to provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or to advocate for access to abortion services in their own country from receiving U.S. international family planning assistance. Co-Sponsor the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (H.R. 2654/ S. 1512) We are committed to promoting the health and economic security of our nations families, we urge you to support the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (H.R. 2654/ S. 1512). This legislation promotes healthy pregnancies and economic security for pregnant women and their families and strengthens the economy.

Senate Support the Whitehouse Amendment to S. 178 and Oppose the Toomey Amendment Protect Students and Maintain School Employees Due Process Protections We write to urge you to improve background check processes by voting NO on the Toomey Amendment to S.178, The Justice for Victims of Sex Trafficking Act of 2015 and YES on the Whitehouse Amendment. We are united in our strong support for protecting the safety of our nations school children. Background checks of school employees are a critical tool in ensuring that our children are safe. All 50 states and DC currently require extensive background checks for school teachers and 43 states require background checks for non-teaching school employees. Nationwide, public schools employ approximately six million teachers, professional staff, and support staff, as well as more than one million contract employees, making education one of our economys largest sectors.

In response to the Interim Final Rules (IFR) on Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act, published in the Federal Register on August 27, 2014 by the Department of the Treasury, Department of Labor (DOL), and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (collectively, the Departments). The IFR provides an alternative process by which an entity eligible for the accommodation may provide notice of its religious objection to providing insurance coverage of contraception or sterilization. We support the participants and beneficiaries of the health plans of eligible entities that avail themselves of the accommodation still receive the benefit of the full range of FDA-approved methods of contraception, sterilization, and related education and counseling without cost-sharing, as guaranteed by Section 2713 of the Public Health Service Act and implementing regulations. We write in response to notices published in the Federal Register on December 11, 2014 by the Department of Labor (DOL) and on December 8, 2014 by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (collectively, the Departments). The notices request public comment pertaining to the Departments collection of information regarding OMB control numbers 1210-0150 and 0938-1248, respectively. The Departments seek comments on the information collection, including how to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. We believe that all women should have access to birth control coverage, as guaranteed under the Affordable Care Act, regardless of where they work or attend school, and we continue to strongly oppose the Supreme Courts decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.2 We submit these comments to ensure that any woman who works for an employer that avails itself of the accommodation nevertheless receives seamless access to birth control coverage without cost-sharing. Leader Pelosi/Speaker Boehner We are writing to express our strong objections to the inclusion of an anti-abortion provision in the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015. Our organizations have always strongly opposed the Hyde amendment because it harms women; we oppose its inclusion in annual appropriations bills and we continue to oppose it in this instance. The Hyde amendment is a discriminatory policy that segregates abortion care-an essential component of womens reproductive health-from other health-care services and disproportionately affects low-income women and communities of color. Blocking women from accessing reproductive-health care is bad policy. The Hyde Amendment has a disproportionate impact on low-income women and robs them of their fundamental rights. To add insult to injury, the Hyde provision in this bill is completely unnecessary, as Hyde restrictions already apply to community health centers. Senate and House CHIP Children's Health Care As any organization concerned about the health and well-being of Americas children and pregnant women, we are writing to urge you to take action as soon as possible to provide a four-year funding extension for the Childrens Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Congress must act quickly to stabilize the CHIP funding stream to ensure that states can continue to operate their programs without interruption. HeaHealth coverage for millions of children could be disrupted if CHIPs future is not secured. For nearly two decades, CHIP has been an essential source of coverage for families, ensuring access to high-quality, affordable, pediatric-appropriate health care for children in working families whose parents earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to purchase private health insurance. Senate Dear Leader Reid: We, the undersigned organizations, object to the inclusion of an abortion restriction in S. 178, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, and appreciate your strong opposition to this restriction. Survivors of trafficking deserve comprehensive health care, not barriers to such care. Helping survivors of trafficking should be a bipartisan effort, as it has been in previous years, not an opportunity to advance anti-womens health priorities. This provision includes a radical expansion of the Hyde amendment, which is an already unjust policy that prohibits federal funding for abortion care in most cases.

We write to express our opposition to the Workplace Advancement Act (S. 2200). This inadequate bill suggests that there is just one solution to address the gender pay gap: a very weak non-retaliation provision that is so narrowly drawn it would do more harm than good. In addition, the bill includes a sense of the Congress that recommits to the legal principles previously passed in the Equal Pay Act of 1963, a law that no longer has the teeth necessary to make meaningful strides in closing the gender pay gap. Dear Member of Congress, On behalf of tens of millions of working families we urge you to become a co-sponsor of the Family And Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act (S. 786/H.R. 1439). The FAMILY Act would create a national family and medical leave insurance program that would strengthen the workforce, families, businesses and our economy. The FAMILY Act is modeled on successful and effective state paid leave laws and would help working women and men meet their caregiving demands while reducing economic inequality and improving economic opportunities for all.

We write to express our opposition to the Workplace Advancement Act (S. 2200). This inadequate bill suggests that there is just one solution to address the gender pay gap: a very weak non-retaliation provision that is so narrowly drawn it would do more harm than good. In addition, the bill includes a sense of the Congress that recommits to the legal principles previously passed in the Equal Pay Act of 1963, a law that no longer has the teeth necessary to make meaningful strides in closing the gender pay gap. Dear Member of Congress, On behalf of tens of millions of working families we urge you to become a co-sponsor of the Family And Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act (S. 786/H.R. 1439). The FAMILY Act would create a national family and medical leave insurance program that would strengthen the workforce, families, businesses and our economy. The FAMILY Act is modeled on successful and effective state paid leave laws and would help working women and men meet their caregiving demands while reducing economic inequality and improving economic opportunities for all.

Oppose Any Amendment to S. Con. Res. 11 that Would Create a Private School Voucher Program We write to express our strong opposition to any amendments to the Fiscal 2016 Senate Budget Resolution (S. Con Res. 11) that would support the creation of a private school voucher or tuition tax credit program. Rather than providing equal access to high quality education, setting high standards and ensuring accountability for all students, these programs have proven ineffective, lack accountability to taxpayers, deprive students of rights provided to public school students, and threaten religious liberty. We oppose the portability provision in the discussion draft of the Every Child Ready for College or Career Act of 2015 We write to express our strong opposition to inclusion of the provision in the Every Child Ready for College or Career Act of 2015 that would dismantle the Title I funding formula. The current draft would provide states the option of making Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to a public school. This proposal would undermine Title Is fundamental purpose of assisting public schools with high concentrations of poverty and high-need students. Furthermore, Title I portability-even when limited to public schools-is a stepping-stone to private school vouchers. Re: We Oppose Title I Portability in H.R. 5, the Student Success Act of 2015 We write to express our strong opposition to the inclusion of any provision in the Student Success Act that would create or lead to a private school voucher. Our opposition extends to the language included in the bill that would make Title I funding portable by allowing the money to follow a child to that childs public school. The portability provision undermines Title Is fundamental purpose of assisting public schools with high concentrations of poverty and high-need students and serves as a stepping-stone to private school vouchers. House/Senate We are dedicated to the health and welfare of our nations youth, we respectfully request your support for the adolescent sexual health promotion programs below during the fiscal year (FY) 2016 funding deliberations. These proven-effective programs provide young people, specifically those most vulnerable and marginalized, with the information they need to make healthy and safe decisions and prevent unintended pregnancy, HIV, and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) throughout their lives. We urge you to fund the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative (TPPI) at $130 million, an additional $6.8 million for evaluation of innovative approaches; fund the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions (CDCs) Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) at $50 million to include at least $3 million for evaluation of school-based HIV prevention; and eliminate funding for the Competitive Abstinence Education (CAE) grant program in the final FY 2016 appropriations. Providing robust funding for TPPI and DASH will help educate and equip young people to make responsible decisions that are vital to their health and well-being and ultimately, the health of our nation.

We applaud Integrating the Healthcare Enterprises (IHE) efforts, in conjunction with the Office of Population Affairs, to develop a method for collecting and exchanging important family planning data in a systemic and structured way, and we are grateful for the opportunity to comment on IHEs proposed Family Planning Profile. Health information technology (health IT) is a foundational component of a more patient-centered, effective and efficient health care system in which women and their health care providers have access to the information they need anytime, anywhere. We write to urge you to include Senator McCaskills bill, the TRICARE Moms Improvement Act of 2014 (S. 1994), in the FY 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). This legislation would require the TRICARE program to cover breastfeeding support, supplies and counseling for breastfeeding mothers in military families, including women in the uniformed services and women who are military dependents. We write in support of the Access to Contraception for Women Servicemembers and Dependents Act of 2014. This bill ensures that all servicemembers and their dependents who rely on the military for health care have comprehensive contraceptive coverage and family planning counseling. We write to urge you to take immediate action to correct the unduly restrictive implementation of the Helms Amendment by issuing guidance to USAID and the State Department to allow abortion services in the cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment. Such action is necessary to safeguard the lives and health of women in developing countries served by U.S. foreign assistance.

We applaud Integrating the Healthcare Enterprises (IHE) efforts, in conjunction with the Office of Population Affairs, to develop a method for collecting and exchanging important family planning data in a systemic and structured way, and we are grateful for the opportunity to comment on IHEs proposed Family Planning Profile. Health information technology (health IT) is a foundational component of a more patient-centered, effective and efficient health care system in which women and their health care providers have access to the information they need anytime, anywhere. We write to urge you to include Senator McCaskills bill, the TRICARE Moms Improvement Act of 2014 (S. 1994), in the FY 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). This legislation would require the TRICARE program to cover breastfeeding support, supplies and counseling for breastfeeding mothers in military families, including women in the uniformed services and women who are military dependents. We write in support of the Access to Contraception for Women Servicemembers and Dependents Act of 2014. This bill ensures that all servicemembers and their dependents who rely on the military for health care have comprehensive contraceptive coverage and family planning counseling. We write to urge you to take immediate action to correct the unduly restrictive implementation of the Helms Amendment by issuing guidance to USAID and the State Department to allow abortion services in the cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment. Such action is necessary to safeguard the lives and health of women in developing countries served by U.S. foreign assistance.

As you develop Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and related agencies, as members of the Family Planning Coalition we respectfully request that you provide $327 million in funding for the Title X family planning program. We write to urge you to include Senator McCaskills bill, the TRICARE Moms Improvement Act of 2014 (S. 1994), in the FY 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). This legislation would require the TRICARE program to cover breastfeeding support, supplies and counseling for breastfeeding mothers in military families, including women in the uniformed services and women who are military dependents. We are pleased to submit the following comments in response to the Healthy Pennsylvania 1115 Waiver released on February 19, 2014. Pennsylvanias 1115 waiver for Healthy Pennsylvania is deeply flawed. Under the pretext of expanding coverage through premium assistance, Pennsylvania is seeking to roll back benefits for current Medicaid beneficiaries. We, support the health and right of immigrate women. We write to express our strong opposition to proposals to restrict access to abortion care for women in U.S. immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICT] detention. We are committed to protecting and improving womens health. We are pleased to submit these comments in response to the Request for Information Regarding Provider Non-Discrimination jointly released by the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Labor, and Department of Treasury (Departments).1 As the Departments develop regulations to implement the provider non-discrimination provision established by section 2706(a) of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), as added by section 1201 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), we urge the Departments to create standards that ensure women have access to covered health services and womens health

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Welcome the introduction of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, H.R. 15, a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. We urge Representatives in Congress to oppose the SAFE Act (HR 2278), a punitive enforcement bill that would lead to dramatic levels of incarceration of immigrants. The SAFE Act would eliminate protections for immigrants - including the current policy that provides discretionary relief to prevent deportation of same-sex partners, and the policy that allows young undocumented LGBT DREAMers to receive temporary authorization to live and work in the U.S., the only country theyve ever known as their home. The SAFE Act would also subject many LGBT and HIV-positive asylum seekers fleeing persecution to indefinite detention in the U.S., re-traumatizing them following brutal mistreatment in their home countries. Finally, the SAFE Act would devolve immigration enforcement to states and localities, leading to racial profiling and rupturing the critical ties between police and LGBT immigrant communities, thus making our communities less safe for everyone.

the Paycheck Fairness Act, S. 84 and H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act: S. 168/H.R. 438, lobby to for equal pay for equal work. VAWA , VAWA (S.47) reauthorization to add all women for coverage including immigrant women and lesbians. Opposes Federally Funded Employment Discrimination Permitted Under the Amendment Offered in Nature of a Substitute to S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act of 2013

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

the Paycheck Fairness Act, S. 84 and H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act: S. 168/H.R. 438, lobby to for equal pay for equal work. VAWA , VAWA (S.47) reauthorization to add all women for coverage including immigrant women and lesbians. Opposes Federally Funded Employment Discrimination Permitted Under the Amendment Offered in Nature of a Substitute to S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act of 2013

the Paycheck Fairness Act, S. 84 and H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act: S. 168/H.R. 438, lobby to for equal pay for equal work. VAWA , VAWA (S.47) reauthorization to add all women for coverage including immigrant women and lesbians. Opposes Federally Funded Employment Discrimination Permitted Under the Amendment Offered in Nature of a Substitute to S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act of 2013

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

the Paycheck Fairness Act, S. 84 and H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act: S. 168/H.R. 438, lobby to for equal pay for equal work. VAWA , VAWA (S.47) reauthorization to add all women for coverage including immigrant women and lesbians. Opposes Federally Funded Employment Discrimination Permitted Under the Amendment Offered in Nature of a Substitute to S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act of 2013

Paycheck Fairness Act S. 84 & H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act, S.186/H.R.438 lobby for equal pay for equal work.Oppose the Working Families Flexibility Act (H.R. 1406), which is an empty promise - a smoke-and-mirrors bill - that offers a pay cut for workers without any guaranteed flexibility or time off to care for their families or themselves. The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1286/S. 631), which makes earned paid sick days available to millions of workers; ï‚· Paid family and medical leave insurance modeled on successful state programs in California and New Jersey; ï‚· Expanded access to the FMLA for more workers for more reasons, and so parents could, in fact, have the time they need to attend parent-teacher conferences without risking their jobs; ï‚· The Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 1010/S. 460) which brings the minimum wage back to a reasonable level and, in so doing, provides businesses with customers, improves our economy, and help locals communities thrive.

Urge support of Senator Kirsten Gillibrands (D-NY) Military Justice Improvement Act (S 967) when it is offered as an amendment to the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act.

We urge your support of Senator Kirsten Gillibrands (D-NY) Military Justice Improvement Act (S 967) when it is offered as an amendment to the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act.

the Paycheck Fairness Act, S. 84 and H.R. 377 and Fair Pay Act: S. 168/H.R. 438, lobby to for equal pay for equal work. VAWA , VAWA (S.47) reauthorization to add all women for coverage including immigrant women and lesbians. Opposes Federally Funded Employment Discrimination Permitted Under the Amendment Offered in Nature of a Substitute to S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act of 2013

Comprehensive Immigration Reform-to ensure that womens priorities and lived realities are at the forefront of the immigration debate. Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act that would be deleterious to the health of women and their families. We urge the Senate Judiciary Committee to lift prohibitions on access to health coverage in the bill and affirm equitable access to health care for all. Appealed for help in ensuring that women and girls who seek safe haven here from gender-based persecution will not be denied protection because of bureaucratic hurdles or unclear legal standards in regards to Immigration reform S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. Strong opposition to the Carter-Aderholt amendment to the FY 2014 House Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. This provision is a mean-spirited attack on health care access and decision making for immigrant women.

Oppose Any Amendment to S. Con. Res 8 that Would Create a Private School Voucher Program

Opposition to the destruction of the public education system by diverting public funds to voucher programs in DC in FY2013 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) reauthorization bills that that would allow the expenditure of scarce federal funds on private school vouchers. For the Local Academic Flexible Grant (Part B of H.R. 3990, the Encouraging Innovation and Effective Teacher Act.