Senator Joe Lieberman Legislative Priorities
Unemployment Compensation
As an independent democrat, I stand to support the reformation of the unemployment compensation inclusive of the amendment necessities and length for the specified business. This is to enable the payment of share up front in every specified year. The unemployment will provide the workers following the termination of their respective jobs through their own faults. They will manage to have the accessibility to monetary payments for the specified period given or until the consideration of securing new jobs. The unemployment payments will be set with the intentions of providing the unemployed workers with time to ensure that they manage to secure new jobs equivalent to the recent ones without experiencing any financial distress (Branch, 2007).
Without the consideration of the rate of unemployment, majority of the workers will be expecting to secure jobs for which they had over qualifications for or ensure they end up on specified welfares. The unemployment compensation will also have the necessary justification through the sustaining of consumer spending with specifications to the economic adjustments period. The unemployment insurance will be majorly basing on dual program with specifications to the state and federal statutes. The program is to be established with the act of the federal security act of 1935. Much of the program is intended to be implemented through the tax act of federal unemployment (Branch, 2007).
Every state is to administer a separate considerable program for the unemployment insurance. This must undergo the approval of the secretary of labor which bases on the availed federal standards. The state intended programs will be applicable to areas with normal regulations of the laws of U.S., but with the special federal rules intended for the nonprofit major organizations and entities of the government. The combination of the state and fedora laws will determine the employee’s eligibility for the specified compensation, the amount to be received with the time frame benefits settlement (Branch, 2007).
For the support of the unemployment compensation intended system, the combination of the federal with state taxes levied upon the specified employees is considerable. The state based employers contributions in consideration to the amount of wages paid by the employer, the amount contributed by the employer to the funds of unemployment, and the specified amount the discharged employees requires for compensation from the fund is of significance. Any of the state tax to be imposed on the specified employers will be credited against the tax of the federal (Branch, 2007).
The proceeds from the unemployment taxes will be deposited in the specified unemployment trust fund. Each state will have a separate account with specifications to the set fund in which deposit will be made. The fund will have separate account for deposits with separate accounts set for the state administrative costs with an extension of the employment compensation. During the recessions of the economy, the federal government will consider providing emergency assistance to enable the accessibility and extension of time frame for the receivership of benefits. This will be accomplished through the temporary authorization of the law to transfer money to a specified state form the extended account of unemployment (Branch, 2007).
The state’s ability to access the emergency system have usual dependence on the rate of unemployment reaching the designated percentage. This majorly happens within the specified state. Under my leadership, some of the state will provide additional unemployment benefits to the specified workers with disabilities. Financing of any disability compensation programs is derived from the employees tax (Branch, 2007).
Building Codes
I am in support of making the building code enforcement navigation easier. The current system should undergo renovate measures to favor businesses in improvising on and opening their respective facilities at times. The building codes will enable the setting of specified acceptable safety standards for the constructed objects inclusive of non-building structures and buildings. The major purpose of the specified building codes will be to enable the protection of public health, general welfare and safety in relation to the occupancy and construction of structures and buildings. The building code should become law with specifications on the specified jurisdictions following formal enactment by the relevant authority (Ching & Winkel, 2012).
The building codes as the regulatory set of rules will be followed to ensure that there is satisfaction of the minimum acceptable levels. The objectives of the given guidelines are necessary in ensuring that safety, health and protection of the general public following the construction with occupancy of specified buildings. Building codes should be determined through appropriate relevant authorities in differing areas with variance in the states. Under my leadership, the states will have building codes developed and improvised by relevant government agencies with a formal application to every construction work and building across the United states. Majority of the local jurisdictions has managed to develop various respective specified codes with specifications to city-specified guidelines (Ching & Winkel, 2012).
The building codes will be applicable to the specified engineers and architects involved in the designing of buildings. They will also serve as guidelines with specifications to safety inspectors. Ths rules are to stipulate the necessary details meant for construction with maintenance of the specified constructions. They are inclusive of fire safety rules: limitations in regards to the spreading of fire, buildings safety exits and the provision of relevant equipments for fire fighting. There are also involved structural rules; the structured buildings necessitates the strength to enable the resistance of external and internal forces without further collapse. The building codes will also cover the stipulations of health inclusive of washrooms, air circulation adequacy and plumbing of facilities (Ching & Winkel, 2012).
In addition, the building codes will ensure that proper limitations to notice is set in place meant for the protection of occupants. There may be a consideration of special provisions for ensuring that the disabled persons have the accessibility throughout and to the property. Any construction with the failure to make adherence to the specified building codes will be liable to severe penalties (Ching & Winkel, 2012).
School Consolidation
I stand in support of school consolidation with improvised opportunities in education. Through the consideration of the opportunities into the states and partnering with specified businesses, the schools will manage to offer most focused relevant training for the children for success. The school consolidation will continue to be of great concern in the United States. There will be an advocation for consolidation through the citing of fiscal imperatives that base upon the specified economies of scale (Branch, 2007).
There will be evidence in addition to demonstrate the relevant advantages involved in small Schools attaining student achievement of higher levels. The consolidated schools will be able to offer the expanded curriculum with prominence with identification in the community following the reduction of costs with specifications to the economy of scale. The consolidation of schools will have the best of curricular with financial advantages following the involvement of the committees connected to the education sector as one of the members. This is to involve the sharing of facilities and courses. The sharing of results will be of variance to the specified curriculum since the limited classes will be dropped following lower enrolment (Branch, 2007).
The expenditures meant for improvising capital with basic maintenance will be reduced following the lack of the need to upgrade the duplicated facilities. Consolidation of the schools will enable the production of psychological benefits. There will be gain of confidence following combination of schools. Extracurricular activities and sports will manage to flourish following the consolidation of schools due to the combined funds (Branch, 2007).
Climate Change
Senator Lieberman views climate change to be greatest threat to the environment. He recognizes the negative consequences that climate change has on national security and the economy. In the absence of deliberate measures to check adverse weather patterns, communities living on coastlines, and the coastlines themselves, are at risk of desolation, not to mention the degradation of infrastructure such as roads and railways. The imminent droughts that are induced by unfavorable climatic patterns are increasingly becoming a real threat to the already insufficient resources of developing nations, and which inevitably become a global responsibility.
From this concern, senator Lieberman has been proactive in finding viable solutions to climate change challenges. Several bills he has sponsored in initiatives to reduce green house gas emission have been voted on by the senate but failed. The American Power Act (APA) is a draft that was released by Senator Lieberman with the support of Senator John Kerry, and which was meant to discuss energy and climate. The objective of the act was creation of new jobs in the economy, enhancement of national security through energy independence initiatives and reduction in greenhouse emissions
Senator Lieberman essentially spearheaded the 1990 amendments on The Clean Air act. These amendments provided the framework for cleaning up of air across the country. Nonetheless, Liebermann co-sponsored the Clean Air Act declaration, which was an initiative in recognition of the benefits of clean air on public health and the economy. Senator Lieberman has consistently opposed attempts to reverse the benefits of this act, which have tremendously enhanced the quality of the country’s air. He has gone through much trouble to address the inefficiency of the country in energy consumption, and to this end, established initiatives meant to increase funding for improved building efficiency. In 2006, the act on the Long Island Sound Stewardship received the approval of the senate and was signed into law; this was senator Lieberman’s concerted effort to provide financial incentive to landowners to uphold preservation of quality environment while improving public access to the area.
With the support of Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY), Kirsten Gellibrand (D-NY) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Senator Lieberman spearheaded the reintroduction of the Long Island Sound Restoration and Stewardship Act, which led to the reauthorization of protection programs for Long Island Sound. In an effort to preserve the natural beauty of Connecticut, senator Lieberman has initiated efforts to protect the rivers, shores, historical sites and recreational areas that make Connecticut a unique location. In the Connecticut Coastal Protection Act introduced and signed into law in 1989, an expansion of Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge was authorized. In 1991, he went ahead to initiate the introduction of the Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge Act, an initiative that led to the establishment of a wildlife refuge with a coverage of 7.2 million acres, and the senator continues to advocate for a sustainable funding for the sites.
Senator Lieberman has introduced numerous bills, majorities of which have received the senate’s approval; his concern and effort in environmental protection are particularly exemplified in these legislations.
The Arctic National Wildlife Protection Act (S. 33)
In his effort to preserve the environment of Connecticut, Senator Lieberman introduced this bill to protect the coast of Arctic Refuge from oil exploration. In 2002, he indeed succeeded in opposing legislation that would have seen the opening of Arctic refuge to exploration and development activity.
. The bill resulted in designation of 1.5 million acres as wilderness, a move that led to the preservation of the area as a wildlife habitat and protected the landscape from the adverse effects of gas and oil exploration (Bimber & Davis, 2003).
The National Fish Habitat Conservation Act (S. 1201)
In this legislation, his objective was the protection and restoration of fish habitats, besides the improvement of the waterways. The bill reflected the most significant attempt to protect fish habitats.
Captive Primate Safety Act (S. 1863)
This legislation was to provide an amendment to Lacey Act Amendments for inclusion of primates as prohibited wildlife species not permitted for commercial purposes both locally and in foreign markets.
Land and Water Conservation Authorization Act (S. 1265)
This is legislation is cosponsored by Senator Lieberman and is not funded by the tax payer, though it has to be subjected to the congressional process of appropriation.
Implementation of National Consensus Appliance Act (S. 398)
The bill contains negotiated standards for appliances, a move that has seen consumers save billions of money. The standards apply to home appliances including freezers, refrigerators, air conditioners and heat pumps. The bill goes forth to enhance standards in efficiency of outdoor lightning.
From: Mr. Joseph ‘Joe’ I. Lieberman’s
Date: 12/06/2012
Scholarships for Opportunity and Results
Letter endorsed by: Ms. Collins, and Mr. Carper
Dear colleague,
I write to ask you to be a co-sponsor for the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Act of 2011. The objective of this Act is provision of corrective action for parents with low income in the District of Columbia, especially parents of students that attend elementary and secondary schools. The corrective action or restructuring is to provide the parents with more opportunities to enroll children in other schools within the district, until the public schools in the district have effectively instituted measures to address the shortfall in security, health and safety, and until the public schools are providing quality learning that is above the current national average.
Based on findings by the congress, it is evident and obvious that parents are in better position to make appropriate decisions that concern their children, and this includes the educational setup that serves the best interests and learning requirements of the children they send to schools . The alternatives provided for public schools. In the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and which was amended in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001and together with the choice of public school programs, are insufficient and inadequate in provision of quality education for parents in the lower income bracket.
The cost per student in the District of Columbia’s public schools is rated to be the highest in the country; the students increasingly record the lowest test scores nationwide. From the report brought into the limelight by National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the margin by which students from the District of Columbia are outperformed by all states round the nation is alarming. The records show that 56 percent of students in fourth grade had an average score of below basic in reading, and 44 percent had a below basic score in mathematics. A similar trend was depicted among students in eighth grade, with 444percent scoring below basic in reading, and 66 percent scoring below basic in mathematics.
With the congress having passed the DC School Choice Incentive Act of 2003, this was to enhance opportunities for provision of scholarship opportunities to parents of students within the district to enable a majority of them access better quality education in private or public secondary and elementary schools of their preference. The opportunity scholarship program as provided in the Act provided an elaborate 3-part funding framework that was inclusive of extra funds for public schools in the District of Columbia. The intention thereby being that there would be continued progress evident in both public and private charter schools and that funding in the schools in the District of Columbia would not be reduced. Additional resources would then be accessible for increased options that would enable families in the district access higher standards of education.
The ultimate objective of the country’s education system is provision of quality education to all students irrespective of the income bracket in which their parents fall. It is in this regard that I urge my colleagues to support the enactment of this legislation in the ultimate national objective of provision of equal opportunities for learning in both the public and private schools, and especially, in the District of Columbia which has continued to post below average performance results in national examinations.
References
Bimber, B. A., & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections. New
York: Oxford University Press. Biography, voting record, and interest group ratings at Project Vote Smart.
Branch, M. C. (2007). Simulation, planning, and society. Westport, Conn.
[u.a.: Praeger.
Ching, F., & Winkel, S. R. (2012). Building codes illustrated. A guide to understanding the 2012 international building code.
Micheal, B. (2000). Campaigns & elections : contemporary case studies. Washington, DC :
CQ Press, c2000.
Peterson, E. (2005). “Dear Colleague” Letters: A Brief Overview. CRS Report for Congress.
