You may be exposed to levels greater than the safety limit

2 views
Skip to first unread message

news....@googlemail.com

unread,
May 6, 2011, 11:49:47 PM5/6/11
to mobilfunk_...@googlegroups.com
noname.html

Omega Group

unread,
May 7, 2011, 3:33:17 AM5/7/11
to Mobilfunk-Newsletter - EMF-Omega-News
Rep Boland would like me to correct my saying the bill lost.
Technically, it did not lose at all. It received 2 YES votes out of 13
votes on the committee which is why many of us considered it a done
deal. However, Rep. Boland is valiantly trying to change committee
members votes as we speak, before it goes to vote on the floor. Out of
the 13 votes, 7 of those votes were supposed to be YES votes which
would have given us the majority, but 5 of them actually ended up
changing their vote after CTIA was given a second shot at testimony at
the work session/vote (not the hearing) and we were not allowed to
refute or rebut any of it, per the committee chair's wishes (he didn't
like the bill). This was obviously not fair, but the chair of the
committee controls the hearing and worksession/vote, so that was how
it went. These are the votes she is currently trying to get changed
back to YES. We of course sincerely hope that Rep. Boland is able to
get at least 5 of the votes changed, if not more, as she is currently
trying to do before it goes to vote on the floor. She is clearly
dedicated to this bill and is a fantastic trooper.

Sincerely, Liz

Omega Group

unread,
May 8, 2011, 8:29:00 AM5/8/11
to Mobilfunk-Newsletter - EMF-Omega-News
Rep. Andrea Boland asked that I send this to you...She put the below
list together with a note at the bottom of the list. She'd like you to
make a call or send an email if you can. The upcoming CA bill is good
start except that it ultimately tells people their cell phones are
safe. Rep. Boland's bill actually puts non thermal effects in the
public dialogue as well as brain tumors and in no way says cell phones
are safe. She is hopeful about changing committee memebers votes just
thinks people should know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but
the truth...

The area code for all the numbers is 207

Sen. Michael Thibodeau, (R - Waldo)), Sen. Chair 223-5177;
mthib...@aol.com

Sen. Christopher Rector (R - Knox), 354-2571 (very difficult)

Sen. Philip Bartlett (D - Cumberland), business: 324-4198 (weak,
almost supported)

(Senators are very important!)

Rep. Stacey Fitts (R- Pittsfield), House Chair 4887-5641; cell
341-0166; repstac...@legislature.maine.gov

Rep. James Hamper (R-Oxford) 529-4586; business 539-4569

Rep. Dean Cray (R-Palmyra) 938-2006; business 478-8279

Rep. Larry Dunphy (R- Embden) 635-2831; cell 399-4963 HE WAS VERY
SUPPORTIVE, but caved in the final vote

Rep. Aaron Libby (R-Waterboro) 247-6461 (extreme conservative)

Rep Jon Hinck (D-Portland) 450-0003 (BEST supporter; writing language
for the minority position, which I'm trying to get other Dems and
Dunphy to accept and change their votes)

Rep. Alexander Cornell du Houx (D-Brunswick) 319-4511

Rep. Roberta B. Beavers (D-South Berwick) 748-3432 THE OTHER GOOD ONE

Rep. Mark N. Dion (D-Portland) 797-6341 Pretty Good Chance of his
changing his vote back to supporting

Rep. Louis Luchini (D-Ellsworth) 664-4699 (WOULD likely follow Dion)

All the Republicans are difficult, but Dunphy was very supportive
before; I think the others did something that freaked him. Or just
that he would be alone of his party members on committee. THERE ARE
OTHER R'S who have said they would be supporting the legislation in
both the Senate and the House.

Calls to any representatives to ask for support is helpful, but the
committee is critical. Calls to senators very important, as the Senate
is most heavily dominated by R's.

Here's the issue: we need to get to them this weekend to be safe that
Monday could be the last chance for them to change their votes. It
could be later, but no guarantee.

They are worried about being unfair, or appearing unfair to business.
THE EMPHASIS is that Hinck wants to have manufacturers just use their
own wording from their manuals, but place it on the package and
characterize it however they want OR put a sticker on the package that
tells consumers to check the owners manual for best use practices. He
doesn't want to use the word "warning" or any words the manufacturer
doesn't use.

MY THRUST to the committee: Do it however you want: label on phone,
package, or insert with the phone, flyer at the store, but give the
public the opportunity to take precautions IF THEY WISH. It is a right
to know thing.

Thanks,

Andrea

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages