Bill Niman and Nicolette Hahn Niman have made a brilliant suggestion for the Obama's next sustainable step now that they've put in a vegetable garden: chickens! There's certainly plently of room on the White House grounds for a nice coop and run. Think how happy their guests will be to have fresh free range eggs for breakfast. Oh, and I bet Malia isn't allergic to chick fluff!



Perhaps us backyard chicken enthusiasts should start a petition.

First off, how ridiculously cute is this photo from Cute Overload? Yes, that is a mother hen sitting on a sleeping puppy. I love how annoyed her chick looks. I mean, that's where he's supposed to sleep!

Okay, down to business. If you live in California, this post is for you. On the November 4th ballot, you'll have some cool stuff to vote for, and a few annoying items to vote against. Lisa, Peggy, Tina and I would like to encourage you to vote yes on one particular proposition: Prop 2.

Proposition 2, also known as the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, would make some small but important changes to how farm animals are treated in California. Essentially, it would "prohibit the cruel confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to tum around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs." (Source) For chickens specifically, the law would mean they would have to be in a cage that allows them to completely spread their wings without touching the sides of the cage or another chicken.

As someone who owns and cares for chickens, and who has seen injured factory-farm hens in person, I think that Proposition 2 is an important first step toward treating our farm animals humanely. Just because we eat animals doesn't mean we can't have some compassion for them while they are alive. Chickens may seem like weird, dumb birds to some, but I can tell you that they do have "personalities" of sorts, and they can feel happy or afraid. I'm sure the same is true for pigs and cows and turkeys. I just don't know any personally.

Many have pointed out that Prop 2 provides the bare minimum of quality of life for chickens, pigs, calves and other animals--and they're right--but I think it's a good first step for California. Hopefully, in the future we'll be able to take further steps to improve the lives of farm animals. Or, you know, maybe everyone should have a coop in their back yard. It is pretty fun.

The opposition to Prop 2 claims that the law will increase food costs and cause farmers to move out of state, but I doubt that. Estimates indicate that the law would cause a mere 1 cent per egg cost increase, and I seriously doubt that transporting eggs and meat from out of state will really be cheaper that treating animals more humanely in state. (Plus, nearby states Arizona, Oregon and Colorado already have similar laws in place, so I'm not sure where those farmers would move to.) And, honestly, I think people should be willing to pay a bit more so that an animal can stand up and turn around during its short life.

So, that's the end of my little political message. This election is going to be really exciting, and I feel hopeful that things will go the way I'd like them to in all the races I'm watching. Fingers crossed!

Exciting news! The California Senate is about to vote on a bill that will significantly cut down on disposable plastic bags state-wide. The bill, AB 2058, will be voted on in the legislature this month, and I really hope it passes.

AB 2058 will require retailers to meet a goal of 70% diversion of plastic bag useage in their stores by 2011. Meaning, they have to distribute 70% fewer plastic bags than they are now. If they don't meet that goal, they will have to charge a 25 cent fee per bag--for both plastic and paper. The proceeds from that fee will go to local litter clean-up. The bill will also allow local governments to charge an additional fee on bags if they choose to. Basically, the fee should make it more likely that people get into the habit of bringing their own reuseable bags to the store.

Living in Los Angeles, it's hard not to see the negative effects of disposable plastic bags. They get stuck in trees, litter the sides of highways and clog up storm drains. And if you look closer, things get even nastier. Recently, the Good Girls (and friends) did a LA River Clean-Up with FoLAR (Friends of the Los Angeles River). We spent about 3 hours picking up trash in a section of the river near my house. As soon as we got down to the river bed, I noticed the plastic bags everywhere. They were wrapped around almost every single tree branch, bush and log. It was pretty disgusting. I think anyone who spent 5 minutes by the LA River would immediately understand why disposable plastic shopping bags have got to go.



I have already sent a message to my state representative asking him to support AB 2058. If you want to do the same, you can look up your representive here. Or, you can let Heal the Bay contact your representative for you by going to their website.

Today is both the 34th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision and Blog for Choice day. So, here's my entry on this year's subject: Why I'm pro-choice.

I don't think there's actually one particular reason why I believe in a woman's right to choose, so I'll list all of them:

1) People should be allowed to control their own bodies, and their bodies should not be subject to the beliefs of whoever is in power at the moment.

2) I don't think teenagers should have kids unless they really want to. People are flawed. Not everyone is going to use birth control every time they have sex. And teenagers are particularly likely to make that mistake. One can argue that teenagers should be told not to sex in the first place, but clearly many of them are still going to. Just because a 15-year-old makes a bad decision--or accidentally uses a condom incorrectly--doesn't mean she should be forced to have a baby. I know that if I had gotten pregnant as a teenager, I would not have been able to handle a pregnancy or the responsibilities of motherhood. That's despite the fact that I had (and have) incredibly supportive parents with the ability to help me financially. I can't imagine what it must be like to be a pregnant teenage girl in an abusive or cash-strapped household.

3) Illegal abortions are dangerous and can be deadly. Even if abortion was illegal, women would still get them--especially desperate women who see no other option. And desperation equals vulnerability. By keeping abortion legal, we keep women who need abortions safe. They can have the procedure done by licensed doctors at regular medical facilities, and they can get any and all follow-up treatment they need.

4) No woman should have to carry a child she doesn't want, and no child should be unwanted at birth. I think "every child a wanted child" is an incredibly powerful slogan, and I fully endorse that idea.

Those are my reasons for being pro-choice. I've never had an abortion myself, but I know women who have, and, honestly, they all believe they made the right decision. I'm just happy that it was their decision to make.

Election day is one week from today, so I thought I'd do a little post about California's Proposition 85, and why all two of the people from California who read this blog should vote "NO" on this particular prop.

Prop 85 is basically a resubmission, with minor changes, of the already rejected Prop 73 from the last California election. It would require women under 18 seeking an abortion to notify their parents of their intent and then wait 48 hours before they could receive the abortion. While most people wouldn't claim that it's a bad thing for parents to be involved in their teenagers' lives, I do believe that it's wrong for the government to mandate parental notification.

Some teenagers may not feel safe telling their parents about their choice to have an abortion, for fear that they would be kicked out of the house or ever physically harmed. This may cause a teenage girl to seek dangerous means to end her unwanted pregnancy, or she may delay necessary medical care to avoid her parents finding out that she's pregnant.

While the proposition does provide for a judicial waiver if a teenager doesn't want to inform her parents, it seems rather unlikely that a girl who is afraid to tell her parents about her choice will have the courage to go before a judge.

Weirdly, one of the arguments that proponents of Prop 85 put forth is that a parental notification law will scare teenage girls into not having sex. Apparently, they think that the idea that they'll have to tell their parents if they want an abortion will make girls stay abstinent. This "logic" seems absurd to me. First, this proposition is supposedly about opening the lines of communication between parent and child, but the prop's backers are saying that kids will not have sex in order to avoid talking to their parents about their sex lives. Huh? Also, I have a feeling that a teenager beset by hormones, emotions and peer pressure is not going to stop and think, "If I get pregnant from the sex I am about to have, I'll have to tell my parents in order to get an abortion. Best to stay abstinent." I don't think most people in their 20s or 30s think that far ahead, let alone teenagers.

If the people backing Prop 85 really cared about preventing unwanted teen pregnancies, they would write a law that mandated comprehensive sex education and encouraged teenagers to educate themselves about the consequences of unprotected sex. Perhaps there could even be a required unit in California's sex education class called "How to talk to your parents about sex." I'd vote for that proposition.

On close inspection, Prop 85 feels like a sneaky way to intimidate teenagers who want to have a safe and legal abortion. Hopefully, Californians will vote "NO" next Tuesday.

The website for the No on 85 campaign can be found here.

Here's an article from the Los Angeles Times laying out arguments from both sides: Abortion Initiative Puts Focus on Girls' Welfare

Today is Blog for Choice day, so I thought I'd do my part and post about abortion rights.

In 2004, I went to the March for Choice in D.C., and it actually made me feel like things might be ok. But now, almost 2 years later, I feel like we have taken steps backward. Of course, a large part of it is because Bush won the 2004 election. But there has also been movement of a state level to restrict abortion. Even here in California, Prop 73--an attempt to create a parental consent law for teenagers seeking abortions--almost passed last year. And similar laws are passing all over the U.S. That concerns me. These laws feel like the first step in a slow, back-door battle to eliminate a woman's right to choose.

What concerns me even more, though, is the success that Bush and cultural conservatives have had in eliminating safe-sex discussions in schools. As someone who went through abstinence-only education, I know how pointless and uninformative it is. The workbooks they gave us when I was in junior high looked like they were developed in the 70s, and mostly taught us how to come up with silly puns about why to save sex until marriage. I learned nothing. Teenagers need all the facts. If Bush really cared about reducing abortions in America, he'd give them the tools they need to protect themselves.

It's our duty as progressives who care to pay attention to what's happening and make some noise about it. We have to stand up and make it known that America is a Pro-Choice country. We have to insist that our youth aren't lied to and talked down to. We have to protect the rights established by Roe v. Wade whenever they are threatened--which is almost all the time these days.

Pro-Child, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice