Take Action to oppose 5G and federal wireless expansion


We need your help!

Yesterday we mailed 541 joint letters to Congress members. The letter is signed by dozens of health, environment and justice advocates and organizations asking them to oppose the many federal bills related to 5G and wireless radiation expansion. It is packed with peer-reviewed science references and solid reasons to oppose.

Please contact your own US Senators and Representative to let them know you support the letter. This is really important because they place more value on hearing from their constituents.

It is easy to contact them via their websites. Below is a sample email, which you can edit, copy and paste into their website contact page. If you’d prefer you can mail, or fax them the letter.

Find your US Senators here:
https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/senators_cfm.cfm 

Find Your US Representative here:
https://www.house.gov/htbin/findrep

SAMPLE EMAIL

Subject line: Joint Letter to Congress, oppose 5G and wireless radiation expansion

Honorable [Representative or Senator] [name]

I support this joint letter to Congress requesting you oppose the many pending federal bills related to the expansion of electromagnetic radio frequency radiation (wireless radiation or RFR) and 5G millimeter wave technology including but not limited to: S.1988 SPEED Act, S.19 Mobile Now Act, S.1682 Airwaves Act, S-88 DIGIT Act, H.Res.521, and S.Res.242.

This letter was mailed to all Congress members on November 14, 2017. The letter provides peer-reviewed science references and solid reasons to oppose 5G and wireless expansion. You can find it online at http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Letter-to-Congress-2017-1.pdf

Peer-reviewed published science shows wireless radiation harms public health and nature. Health effects include: fatigue, headaches, sleep problems, anxiety, ringing in the ears, heart problems, learning and memory disorders, increased cancer risk, and more. Children, the ill, and the elderly are more vulnerable. International independent scientists are calling for biologically-based public exposure standards and reducing wireless radiation.

Communications are safer using wired and corded connections. It is in the best public and environmental interest to avoid unnecessary wireless radiation exposures.

Please oppose any and all bills related to 5G and wireless radiation expansion.

Thank you for your consideration,

Warm regards from your constituent,
[your name]

Defeat of Cell Tower Bill SB 649 Celebrated and Next Steps

On Sunday, Oct. 29 Sebastopol Mayor Una Glass joined EMF Safety Network for a photo at the Sebastopol Farmers Market to celebrate the defeat of Senate Bill 649, which would have created a state mandated system of cell towers in California. Governor Brown vetoed SB 649 two weeks ago.
Sebastopol, Santa Rosa, and Sonoma County were among the 300 cities, 47 counties and over 100 organizations opposed to SB 649. Senator McGuire and Assemblyman Levine also opposed the bill.
The defeat of SB 649 was won by a consortium of organizations, especially the League of California Cities, RCRC representing Rural Counties, Best Best and Krieger, Environmental Working Group and the many organizations who opposed the bill.
As for our contributions, early on EMF Safety Network (EMFSN) partnered with Ecological Options Network (EON) and formally opposed SB 649 when it was first introduced in March, and re-introduced our opposition to the subsequent committees.
We were fortunate to have Environmental Working Group to guide us on how to oppose the bill. We created a letter template and brought in many groups to oppose SB 649.  We kept our list members informed via email, website, Facebook and Twitter. We gave people the science, tools, flyers and information on how to take action to oppose SB 649.

Read more including next steps

Unlocking the door:  How to successfully get through to people about wireless radiation.

By: Rachel Gaunt: For years I have been talking to people about the risks of wireless radiation. People who already “get it” are an easy audience. They nod and agree vehemently. But conversing with people who are new to this subject has not been so easy.

Too often I see their eyes glaze over, watch them shift uncomfortably, or frown and get defensive. The more I ramp up my passion about the subject the more they retreat.

As someone who has worked extensively in the field of communication and consumer motivation, I’m no stranger to activist campaigns, but this was a new level of puzzle. Why didn’t these folks – my family and my dear friends -want to hear the truth about some critical information pertinent to their health?

I used to fantasize that if I just got the exact right message or the right order of facts, they would magically come around and see the light.

But if there was one exact right message I hadn’t yet found it.

It wasn’t until I conducted some creative concept focus groups that I glimpsed the answer. This small-scale qualitative research helped me see what NOT to do. It also shed light on a way to get through the defense and reach people successfully.

Today I feel like there is a way to get through to people. It is not magic, it is a particular four step formula that I want to share.

Step One: Making the Invisible Visible

First off, the opening gambit has to change their worldview. It has to affect them viscerally. It is not enough to appeal to their rational brain alone, it has to touch their whole being, head, heart and instinct…. something they feel deep in their gut. It is only a visceral response that changes their worldview and opens the door.

Read More

SB 649 barely passes Assembly and Senate moves to the Governor

On Sept.13, the California Assembly voted on SB 649, the bill that would allow cell towers on every block. On the first vote, the bill did not get enough votes to pass. On the second it passed, but just barely. On Sept. 14 the Senate also barely passed the bill. Now SB 649 goes to the Governor’s desk. Since the bill received less than 50 votes in the Assembly, that could help support a veto. The Governor has until October 15 to sign or veto the bill.

UPDATE! Governor Jerry Brown VETOED SB 649.  Please thank him!
Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-2841 Fax: (916) 558-3160
https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/gov39mail/

Learn more about SB 649 here: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/stop-sb-649-in-california/

How did your representative vote on SB 649? If they voted NO, or did not vote please consider sending them a thank you. If they votes yes, you can let them know you are disappointed with their vote.

Assembly person: 16 Noes: Baker, Caballero, Chiu, Cooley, Eggman, Cristina Garcia, Kalra, Levine, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O’Donnell, Quirk-Silva, Ridley-Thomas, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting
17 No Votes Recorded: Berman, Bloom, Bonta, Calderon, Chau, Chu, Cunningham, Dahle, Friedman, Gallagher, Eduardo Garcia, Holden, Limón, Mullin, Reyes, Wood, Rendon
46 Ayes: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Bigelow, Bocanegra, Brough, Burke, Cervantes, Chávez, Chen, Choi, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez Fletcher, Gray, Grayson, Harper, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kiley, Lackey, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Obernolte, Patterson, Quirk, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Voepel, Waldron, Weber

Senators: 10 Noes: Allen, Beall, Glazer, Hill, Jackson, Leyva, McGuire, Monning, Portantino, Wieckowski
8 No Votes Recorded:
Bradford, Galgiani, Mendoza, Mitchell, Moorlach, Newman, Roth, Stern
22 Ayes:
Anderson, Atkins, Bates, Berryhill, Cannella, De León, Dodd, Fuller, Gaines, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hueso, Lara, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Skinner, Stone, Vidak, Wiener, Wilk

STOP cell towers on every block in California #STOPSB649

Cell towers emit harmful radiation.
If Senate Bill 649 passes you could awake in 2018 to find a cell tower outside your bedroom window, or on your children’s school. Senate Bill 649 would create a state mandated system of cell towers every couple hundred feet apart.  SB 649 would harm California.

SB 649 would eliminate local control and public input.  It would allow refrigerator-size cell equipment on utility poles, streetlights, sidewalks, in parks, on schools, hospitals, and any public building with no safety oversight. Only fire stations, coastal commission and historic areas are exempt. Cities would have no recourse to remove a tower even if every resident complained.

Peer-reviewed published science shows harmful effects of cell tower radiation include: fatigue, headaches, sleep problems, anxiety, ringing in the ears, heart problems, learning and memory disorders, increased cancer risk, and more.  Children are especially vulnerable. See  Biological Effects from Radiofrequency Radiation  and www.emfscientist.org

SB 649 would harm nature. Peer reviewed published studies found radiation harms trees, birds, bees and insects.  Studies of radiation impacts on wild birds documented nest abandonment, plumage deterioration and death. https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf More studies here: http://www.emfresearch.com/emf-wildlife/

SB 649 would lay the groundwork for 5G millimeter wave technology.  What is 5G?  See this fact sheet.  Peer reviewed published science shows millimeter waves adversely affect health. https://goo.gl/gbBKHL More studies here.

300 cities, 47 (out of 58) counties, and dozens of health, environment, consumer, and justice organizations representing millions of Californians have opposed SB 649. Organizations opposed to SB 649 9:8:2017

Here are letters from specific groups: Environmental Working Group  AARP American Association of Retired Persons  Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments  Ecological Options Network, EMF Safety Network  Dr. Golomb Oppose SB 649

UPDATE! Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB 649!

On October 15 Governor Brown Vetoed SB 649!  Can you thank him? You can call his office, send a letter by mail, fax, or contact him through his website.

Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-2841 Fax: (916) 558-3160 https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/gov39mail/

 

SB 649 is a shameless gift to the telecom industry

photo courtesy Kevin MottusIf Senate Bill 649 passes…
in 2018 you could awake to a cell tower right outside your bedroom window.

Unless you live in a fire station, a coastal commission or a historical city, SB 649 would put cell towers in every neighborhood and countryside in California. SB 649 would only allow design of how refrigerator sized equipment on and near poles can look.

Over the counter permits would eliminate local review of radiation impacts and essentially deregulate the telecom industry.  300 California cities and 47 counties oppose SB 649.

SB 649 will increase harmful radiation pollution.  Independent scientists are calling for immediate action to reduce radiation:

“Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans.” https://www.emfscientist.org/

Peer reviewed published studies found radiation causes a wide range of health impacts including sleep problems, headaches, tinnitus, DNA damage and cancer. Children are more vulnerable.

“The harmful effects of electromagnetic fields, regardless of their frequencies, are now scientifically settled. Pregnant women (the fetus) and children and adolescents are particularly vulnerable.”- Dominique Belpomme, MD, MPH, Paris V Descartes University, European Cancer & Environment Research institute.

Peer reviewed published studies found radiation harms nature, trees, birds, and bees. Studies of radiation impacts on wild birds documented nest abandonment, plumage deterioration and death. https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf

Read our opposition letter here: SB 649 UPDATE 7:6:2017

SB 649 abandons the public to trust the telecom industry to certify radiation safety.

EMFSN, EON and CABTA in the news on KPFA and here.

Health, environment, consumer, and justice organizations  representing millions of Californians have opposed SB 649 including:  Environmental Working Group, Sierra Club California, California League of Conservation Voters, AARP American Association of Retired Persons, Association of Environmental Professionals, Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, California Communities Against Toxics, Center for Environmental Health, Citizens for Health, SF Public Utilities Commission, The Greenlining Institute, The Utility Reform Network, Teens Turning Green, As You Sow, Baby Safe Project, Bay Area Educators for Safe Tech, California Brain Tumor Association, Chico Chapter of Weston A. Price Foundation, Citizens For A Radiation Free Community, Consumers for Safe Cell Phones, Daily Acts, East Bay Move to Amend, Ecological Options Network, EMF Safety Network, Environmental Health Trust, Environmental Voices, EMR Protection Forum, Grassroots Environmental Education, Green Sangha, Health & Habitat Inc, Healthy 880 Communities, Law Offices of Harry V. Lehmann PC, Marin Chapter of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Mom’s Across America, Moms Advocating Sustainability, National Association For Children and Safe Technology, Parents for a Safer Environment, The Peoples Initiative Foundation, Physicians for Safe Technology, Radiation Research Trust, Sacramento Smart Meter Awareness, Sage Associates, Scientists for Wired Technology, Seniors for Environmental Awareness, Stop Smart Meters, Veterans for Radiation Safety, Windheim EMF Solutions, Wireless Radiation Alert Network, Wireless Radiation Education and Defense, and Your Own Health and Fitness.

The majority of these groups listed above oppose SB 649 based on the science of wireless harm.

The Communication and Conveyance committee passed the bill on  July 12. The Assembly Appropriations Committee passed the bill on September 1.

The State Assembly and Senate barely passed SB 649 and the bill now awaits the Governor’s signature or veto.  Find how your representatives voted here: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/sb-649-barely-passes-the-assembly-moves-to-the-senate/

Update on Oct.15, 2017 Governor Brown Vetoed SB 649!

Stop radar in cars!

If you don’t want a smart meter on your home, you won’t want V2V in cars. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is proposing to mandate radar (called V2V technology) in all new cars and light trucks.

The stated purpose of the V2V is to improve driving safety by warning drivers of imminent crash risks in time to avoid them and pave the way for self-driving cars.

V2V is like a smart meter in your car! The antenna is omni-directional, allowed to transmit up to approximately 2 watts of power output at 10 Mhz and 5.9 Ghz with a range of 300 meters, or three football fields in length, every 100 milliseconds, or 10 pulses a second. The proximity of the transmitter to the driver and passengers is unknown, but could be inches to a few feet away from people in the car.

We strongly oppose mandating V2V in cars and light trucks. All roadway corridors will have significant increases in RFR exposure from V2V and supporting infrastructure.  V2V poses increased safety hazards to drivers, passengers, people in homes who live along roadways, cyclists, and pedestrians. Increased RFR exposure from V2V threatens nature, trees, birds, bees and other insects. Vulnerable populations such as children, seniors, people with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), and people with medical implants are at greater risk of harm.  Assertions of RFR harm are based in peer reviewed published science.

The NHTSA states they are taking RFR concerns seriously, however they make a couple of important inaccurate statements:

  1. No scientific evidence establishes a causal link between wireless device use and cancer or other illnesses.
  2. There’s no scientific basis to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure.
  3. The National Environmental Policy Act does not apply.
  4. V2V will not have a disproportionate effect on children.
  5. Consumer education by the Federal Government and vehicle manufacturers may help to alleviate RFR concerns.

We believe V2V technology will not make driving safer, but will make driving more harmful to people and the environment, create mobility access barriers, and should be stopped.

Comments are due Wed. April 12, by 11:59 ET.  Please comment on why you oppose V2V here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=NHTSA-2016-0126-0009

EMF Safety Network posted these comments to NHTSA: EMF Safety Network V2V comments

Oppose SB-649 “small cells” in California

July 15, 2017 update to this post is here: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/sb-649-is-a-shameless-gift-to-the-telecom-industry/

Would you want to have these all over your town, in your neighborhood, maybe even in front of your house?

SB-649 is a current California Senate bill introduced by Senator Hueso.  EMF Safety Network opposes this bill because it will fast track wireless radiation antenna deployments in our neighborhoods and communities, and thwart public participation.

The League of California Cities opposes SB-649.  They describe it stating, “This proposal unnecessarily and unconstitutionally strips local authority over public property and shuts out public input and local discretion by eliminating consideration of the aesthetic and environmental impacts of “small cells.”

How to oppose SB-649 “Wireless telecommunications facilities”

Please submit your comments by April 3rd!

1.  Go to http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB649

2.  Scroll down and click on “Comments to Author”

3.  If you have not registered you will need to do so.

4.  After you register click the circle “oppose” and send your comments (2000 characters) to the author by March 28.  If you are representing a group please sign as such.  Before you click submit, copy your comments into a separate email.

5.  Send the same comments to your State Senator which you can find here:  Type in your address and city.  http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/

EMF Safety Network and Ecological Options Network sent the following letter opposing SB-649.

Suggested comments:  If you need help with what to say you can use any or all of these comments which are adapted in part from the California League of Cities form letter, and our letter.

Dear Senator Hueso,

I respectfully oppose SB-649. This proposal unnecessarily and unconstitutionally strips local authority over public property and shuts out public input and local discretion by eliminating consideration of the aesthetic and environmental impacts of “small cells.”

International scientists and doctors advise reducing wireless radiation exposure to protect public and environmental health.

Wireless disrupts cellular communication, damages immune and nervous systems, desynchronizes brain and heart rhythms, and causes headaches, sleep problems, tinnitus, anxiety and a host of other health problems.

5G millimeter wave technology is scientifically shown to affect humans, penetrating the skin and affecting biological systems

There is no substantial evidence to support SB649’s determination that the deployment fits the CEQA exemption. There is substantial evidence in support of a fair argument that the project may create environmental impacts.

The National Toxicology Program published a 25 million dollar study which is one of the largest and most comprehensive studies on cell phone radiation and cancer. In the study the rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed two types of cancers, glioma, a brain tumor, and schwannoma, a tumor in the heart.

This bill strips local government of the authority to protect the quality of life of their residents, and to protect public property and the public right-of-way from relatively unconstrained access by small cells.

Neither the CPUC, nor the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) can be relied on to serve the public interest because they are both regulatory captured agencies.

SB 649 goes too far by requiring local governments to approve “small cells” in all land use zones, including residential zones, through a ministerial permit, thereby shutting the public out of decisions that could affect the aesthetics of their community and the quality of their environment.

Thank you!

[your name]