Dear Mr President

Dear Mr. President,

We write with deep concern over a growing trend of laws and proposed legislation targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals in Africa. These laws, combined with the growing public vitriol by government officials and the media, threaten to usher in an era of widespread oppression of the LGBT community in many African countries. We believe the enforcement of these laws would be a human rights abuse in violation of the standards set forth in the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).

Already this year, both Nigeria and Uganda have enacted laws that impose harsh penalties for homosexual activity and activism on behalf of LGBT people. Despite strong opposition from the United States and many other nations, Nigeria enacted the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act in January, and one month later, Uganda’s President signed into law the Anti-Homosexuality Act. In Nigeria, the legislation immediately triggered an outbreak of violent anti-gay attacks.

As you know, Uganda and Nigeria are among the countries eligible for AGOA, which has allowed for duty-free treatment of certain imports from sub-Saharan African countries since 2000. Congress passed this law with a clear intention to make the benefits of this non-reciprocal agreement contingent on these countries’ commitment to human rights. AGOA states that a country is only eligible for preferential trade status if that country “does not engage in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”

The jurisprudence in the area of international human rights supports respect of sexual orientation and gender identity as human rights. We therefore ask that your Administration review Nigeria and Uganda’s eligibility for AGOA’s trade preference and, if it is determined that those countries are not “making continual progress” in meeting the statute’s requirements, that you take steps to revoke AGOA eligibility to Nigeria and Uganda in accordance with 19 U.S. C. §2466a(a)(3). We believe that the discriminatory anti-LGBT laws in those countries represent a clear violation of human rights and hope that the interagency process charged with AGOA’s annual review will make this recommendation. We further ask that you not restore eligibility until these beneficiary countries have taken steps to eliminate harsh penalties for LGBT persons.

As the International Trade Commission (ITC) correctly stated when AGOA was first passed, “Congress never intended AGOA to be a blank check for all African countries, without regard to performance. It was meant to offer tangible incentives for African governments to improve their political and economic governance, not to underwrite poor policies.” Some of the leaders who promote the benefits of AGOA in their respective countries, including Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni, are the same leaders now presiding over the deterioration of LGBT rights in Africa. By revoking AGOA eligibility, the United States will be sending a clear message that countries must choose between enjoying the benefits of AGOA and violating the human rights of LGBT individuals. We thank you for your attention to this matter and urge you to act swiftly.

Sincerely,

Christopher S. Murphy

United States Senator

Tammy Baldwin

United States Senator

Martin Heinrich

United States Senator

Richard Blumenthal

United States Senator

Barbara Boxer

United States Senator

Al Franken

United States Senator

Kirsten Gillibrand

United States Senator

Edward Markey

United States Senator

Sherrod Brown

United States Senator

Mark E. Udall

United States Senator

This is about ALL of us

BLUMENTHAL STATEMENT ON SCOTUS HOBBY LOBBY DECISION

(Washington, DC) – U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) today released the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

“Today, the Supreme Court held for the first time that the religious rights of corporations trump the personal freedoms of American women. This decision undermines millions of American women's access to birth control. Religious liberty is about the right to practice your religion, not the right to impose your religion on your employees. Congress must act to restore workers' right to make their own health care decisions.”

SNAP - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

A very Very long email From the Connecticut Democratic Party...Which is actually about an important subject FOOD FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT.

I hope the length and wordiness is not a turnoff on this important information. If so, just cruise to the end and click on the link.

Our Congressional delegation in Washington D.C. has taken a stand against the latest cuts to SNAP in the most recent Farm Bill. And this week, Governor Dan Malloy took immediate action to prevent Connecticut residents from losing their SNAP benefits as a result of the latest round of cuts.

 [...]

NO FAMILY IN AMERICA DESERVES TO GO HUNGRY: SNAP CUTS

SNAP was established as an assistance program for low-income families to ensure they could put food on their tables. As Democrats, we believe it is the duty of a good government to help those who need help in critical areas such as buying groceries.

Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, have referred to SNAP as another entitlement that promotes government dependency. Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan in particular referred to SNAP as “a hammock that lulls able-bodied adults to a life of dependence and complacency.” This is not true.

PROGRESS IN CONNECTICUT

To prevent an estimated 50,000 low-income households in Connecticut from losing their SNAP benefits, Governor Malloy directed his Administration to meet the new standards of the 2014 Farm Bill. By dedicating additional energy assistance dollars to eligible SNAP recipients, this will prevent an estimated average of $112 in monthly benefits from being slashed from families in need. Additionally, the Governor’s directive will preserve approximately $66.6 million annually in SNAP benefits for households in Connecticut.

Governor Malloy:

“Connecticut, for one, will not stand by while our low-income families and elders are put at risk by Washington politics. I have directed my Administration to take all necessary measures to protect Connecticut beneficiaries of the federal SNAP program from the negative consequences of the Farm Bill.” 

Lt. Governor Nancy Wyman:

“Our decisive action means that Connecticut residents will be held harmless from the worst type of cuts at the worst possible time in one of the most critical of national safety-net programs.”

ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL

For the second time in less than three months, SNAP benefits have been cut. Last fall, $5 billion was cut from SNAP, costing roughly $17 to $36 a month in food assistance for Connecticut families. This is after Republicans initially proposed a $40 billion cut to the SNAP program. 

In the latest Farm bill reauthorization, a total of $8.7 billion in additional cuts to SNAP will take place over the next ten years. On the whole, this may cost families who rely on SNAP assistance $90 a month, or the equivalent of 34 meals. Nationwide, 850,000 households will receive less SNAP aid, while it is estimated approximately 65,000 Connecticut residents will receive less aid.

The Facts:

• In 2010, this program lifted nearly 5.2 million Americans over the poverty line. This included 2.2 million children.
• Nearly 47 million Americans across the country depend upon food stamp assistance to feed their families. Among this group are low-income families, disabled individuals, veterans and senior citizens.
• Food stamps only provide roughly $4.50 a day in assistance to recipients.
• SNAP boasts one of the lowest error rates of any federal program in the country.
• Every dollar in SNAP benefits generates $1.79 in economic activity.
• Denying families SNAP benefits also denies their children free meals at school.
• On average, half of SNAP recipients are on the program for only ten months or less.

All seven members of our Congressional delegation understand the consequences working families will face with this latest round of draconian cuts to SNAP, and have voted against SNAP cuts in the past.

[Ed: Here are quotes from our 2 Senators and the Congresswoman from the 3rd CD, which includes New Haven County. I have cut out the others.]

Senator Richard Blumenthal:

“We should keep faith with struggling families in America, including more than 400,000 Connecticut residents, by maintaining current levels of SNAP funding, and expanding food assistance in the state and across the country if needed.”

Senator Chris Murphy:

“There is no doubt that Congress needs to reduce spending, but balancing the budget on the backs of our nation’s most vulnerable is foolish and irresponsible.”

 

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro:

“These cuts are terrible for families on the edge, terrible for our economic recovery, and terrible for the future. Imagine we had a miracle vaccine that made everyone who took it healthier, and encouraged children’s growth and brain development. If such a vaccine existed, wouldn’t we try to vaccinate every child in America? We do have that vaccine and it is called food.” 

 

If you stand with President Barack Obama, Governor Malloy, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Murphy, Congressman Larson, Congressman Courtney, Congresswoman DeLauro, Congressman Himes, Congresswoman Esty and other Democratic leaders, add your name to our petition: CLICK HERE TO STAND WITH DEMOCRATS AND PRESERVING SNAP.