14. November 2013 · Comments Off · Categories: Law · Tags: ,

New Law Obama
new law obama

What is the new law obama is trying to pass that prohibits schools from having summer school and students needing a test to get out of highschool and graduate?

Answer by Obama can keep the change!
I know he’s signing a bill that would make it illegal to debate a sitting President?

Answer by xpatinasia
There is no law similar to what you described.

Answer by meg
Never heard of such a law, I think you heard wrong, it is more likely that he would propose a law that would provide federal funding for summer school if we did not have budget problems,

new law obama

McLean, VA (PRWEB) November 13, 2014

President Obama today signed into law the School Access to Emergency Epinephrine Act during a ceremony attended by Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) CEO John L. Lehr, members of FAREs board of directors and key congressional sponsors. This historic and potentially lifesaving legislation is the first federal law encouraging schools to stock epinephrine for use in allergic emergencies, and has been championed by FARE for more than two years.

The law, passed by the Senate on Oct. 31 and by the U.S. House of Representatives on July 30, encourages states to require schools to keep lifesaving epinephrine on hand and ensure school personnel are trained to use it. The bill received strong bipartisan support and was passed by unanimous consent in both chambers.

We are thrilled to see this legislation signed by President Obama and thank him for bringing national attention to the need to protect students with food allergies, said John L. Lehr, CEO of FARE, who was joined at the bill signing ceremony by Rob Nichols and Amie Rappoport McKenna, members of FARE’s Board of Directors. It is our hope that this legislation serves as the catalyst for states to recognize the need to not just allow schools to stock epinephrine, but to require this important medication be available to our students and empower school personnel to save lives.

FARE has championed this legislation since 2014, bringing the daughter of country music star Trace Adkins to Capitol Hill to meet with members of Congress in support of the bill. Brianna Adkins, who visited Capitol Hill with her mother Rhonda, has multiple food allergies and is credited by one of the bills original co-sponsors, Rep. Phil Roe, M.D., (R-Tenn), with being one of the best lobbyists he has talked to in Washington, D.C.

In spring of 2014, FARE brought parent advocates to Capitol Hill to inform legislators about the critical need for this legislation. Among the parent advocates who attended was Laura Pendleton, whose daughter Amarria died just months earlier of an anaphylactic reaction at her elementary school. The bill was re-introduced this session in the House by Roe and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.), and in the Senate by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.).

The School Access to Emergency Epinephrine Act incentivizes states to adopt laws requiring schools to have stock epinephrine auto-injectors by giving these states preference in eligibility for federal asthma education grants. Thirty states now have laws or guidelines in place allowing schools to stock undesignated epinephrine auto-injectors, but only four states (Maryland, Nebraska, Nevada and Virginia) currently require it.

In addition to FARE, the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Emergency Medicine and the National Association of Elementary School Principals endorsed the School Access to Emergency Epinephrine Act.

ABOUT FARE

Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) works on behalf of the 15 million Americans with food allergies, including all those at risk for life-threatening anaphylaxis. This potentially deadly disease affects 1 in every 13 children in the U.S. or roughly two in every classroom. Formed in 2014 as a result of a merger between the Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network and the Food Allergy Initiative, FAREs mission is to ensure the safety and inclusion of individuals with food allergies while relentlessly seeking a cure. We do this by providing evidence-based education and resources, undertaking advocacy at all levels of government, increasing awareness of food allergy as a serious public health issue and investing in world-class research that advances treatment and understanding of food allergies. For more information, please visit http://www.foodallergy.org.








How do you feel about the new laws Obama wanted in the 2014 NDAA?

Do you like his idea of using the military against US citizens, indefinite detainment of US citizens, no trial, and even assassination of US citizens only by being given a label by the president?

Answer by Stone Cold Said So
I think the idea that the Democratic Party is about more freedom is a myth.

Answer by Mr. Wolf
The NDAA bill reaffirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. Both Democrats and Republicans voted for the NDAA. The senate vote for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 was YEAs 86 and NAYs 13. The provision clearly states it does not apply to US citizens. That is why right-wing media never post the exact wording of the bill.

From the actual bill:
SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
Paragraph (e) “Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
Paragraph (b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Answer by bash
Since that’s completely false, I “feel” like you’re lying.

new law obama

Recommended:

Recent Search:

  • new laws 2014
  • 2014 New laws

Comments closed