Rep. Gilliard Celebrates Final Passage of the Original 33 Memorial Act
'I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Chairman Matt Brass for his dedicated leadership in carrying this bill through the Senate,' said Rep. Gilliard. 'Today, we honor the giants—the Original 33 African Americans elected to the Georgia General Assembly in 1868. Unfortunately, they were denied their rightful place in history due to the color of their skin, with 14 of them suffering the unimaginable fate of lynching.'
The Original 33 Memorial Act aims to honor and commemorate the lives and contributions of 33 great Americans.
'With the passage of this bill, we collectively send a powerful signal that Georgia remembers and recognizes the contributions of these 33 courageous Americans,' added Rep. Gilliard. 'Finally, we can salute these great leaders and celebrate their legacy and sacrifices.'
HB 303 now heads to the governor's desk. The full text of HB 303 may be found here.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hundreds gather for Handshake Across the Border
Canadians and Americans met at the International Peace Garden at the Manitoba-North Dakota border Saturday for a symbolic handshake. Organizers say the event is a reminder of the enduring connection between the two countries, even amid political tensions.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - H-1Bs are wreaking havoc on American workers
When it comes to immigration, there's a refrain that periodically arises with respect to new immigrants: 'They're even more American than us,' or something to that effect. And if immigration causes any ill effects on Americans already here — such as disruptions in the economy or employment environment — they are reminded that they should just grit their teeth and 'learn to code.' Unfortunately, that advice may no longer be helpful. Layoffs in the tech industry for 2025 had already exceeded 80,000 as of July, according to estimates. Although the public may know the tech climate has been bleak, they haven't heard much about the causes. Corporate executives have been eager to insinuate that AI is driving the employment environment. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said in June that there would 'be fewer people doing some of the jobs that the technology actually starts to automate.' However, Jassy did not mention another factor — the employment data indicate that Amazon has led corporate America in spurning U.S. workers in favor of foreign-born alternatives. The company's main operating arm submitted 31,817 Labor Condition Applications for H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 visas in the second quarter of fiscal 2025, according to data published by the Labor Department's Office of Foreign Labor Certification. The number grows higher — to 40,757 — if one accounts for Amazon Web Services, the company's cloud-management division. NVIDIA placed a distant second with 27,244 applications. Other top offenders included Goldman Sachs, which used three entities to file more than 26,000 applications. There's also Microsoft (14,181 applications) and Apple (8,393 applications). Labor Condition Applications allow companies to fill roles based in the U.S. with foreign laborers. They recently came under fire from Vice President JD Vance. Alluding to Microsoft's announcement of layoffs weeks earlier, Vance said at an event, 'You see some Big Tech companies where they'll lay off 9,000 workers, and then they'll apply for a bunch of overseas visas.' He added that he 'just found out' and had 'not yet had that conversation with Microsoft.' In a statement, Microsoft denied that Americans had been laid off as a result of their foreign alternatives, pointing to the fact that it had also reduced its H-1B workforce. 'Our H-1B applications are in no way related to the recent job eliminations in part because employees on H-1Bs also lost their roles,' a spokesman told me. He added that 78 percent of Microsoft's applications over the last 12 months were for 'existing employees.' Although these foreign workers are, in theory, intended to fill 'high-skill' roles, the data tell a different story. According to the Labor Department, 82 percent of Microsoft's H-1B applications for 2025 have been for positions the department classifies as Level I or II — entry or mid-level roles paid at or below the 34th wage percentile. To put that in simpler terms: Microsoft is paying 82 percent of its foreign workers less than the prevailing market rate for their positions. Even if Microsoft were able to find Americans willing to work for less than they're worth, Microsoft wouldn't be required to make any attempt to hire them — despite a widely held belief that H-1B employers are required to certify that they haven't been able to find Americans to employ. 'It is remarkable how many policy wonks, news organizations, and academics get this critical fact wrong,' Howard University Professor Ron Hira, an H-1B expert who has testified on the issue before Congress, told me in an interview. 'My experience suggests that more elites believe the falsehood than the truth. The program would look radically different and function much better if such a requirement existed.' It is little wonder that younger Americans suspect all of this labor importation may have something to do with the challenges they're facing. That applies not just in terms of employment, but also of problems ranging from the national housing shortage to the rising cost of car insurance to traffic congestion — which, as anecdotal evidence would have it, spontaneously fell amid immigration raids in Los Angeles last month. Naysayers will disagree, nitpick, or read legalese about how their foreign workers were onboarded years ago to rationalize the idea that Americans haven't been affected. And that's fine, but it isn't going to change the fact that voters aged 18-21 sided with Republicans by a double-digit margin in Yale's recent youth poll, largely due to these very concerns. Of course, those numbers could shift, particularly if Republicans fail to take action — likely pushing those young voters even further to the right. Aside from Vance, mainstream politicos have been largely silent on this issue — perhaps because they don't want to offend their corporate patrons. The best they can do is stay silent and hope that voters forget. The media appear to be fully on board with that plan. As of July, a search for stories involving the Office of Foreign Labor Certification published within the last year returned zero results from outlets including The New York Times, Washington Post, and NBC News, among many others. Contrast that with The Times' obsessive concern with the State Department terminating a little more than 1,300 employees. 'Cuts at State Department Demote Longtime U.S. Values,' the paper declared in the headline of a news (not opinion) article. It sounds like firing a federal worker is akin to an attack on the very fabric of America's values. By that measure, they must be the most American of us all. That must be nice, but it may not elicit much sympathy from those who have somehow been deemed less essential to the country than their foreign replacements. Rudy Takala has served as an editor for Fox News and The Hill and as a reporter for the Washington Examiner. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Appeals Court rules DOGE can access sensitive federal data
An appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can access sensitive federal data of millions of Americans, reversing a temporary injunction that was issued earlier this year. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in a 2-1 decision that unions looking to bar DOGE from accessing sensitive data at the Treasury Department, Office of Personnel Management and Department of Education were unlikely to succeed on the merits as they argued that the move would be a violation of federal privacy laws. In March, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman prevented DOGE from accessing troves of personal data at the three agencies of around 2 million plaintiffs. A month later, in April, a panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit issued a pause, in a 2-1 ruling, on Boardman's decision to lessen the DOGE's access to personal data. Five union organizations, including the National Federation of Federal Employees and the American Federation of Teachers, along with six Americans, sued the three agencies over DOGE's access to personal data. Judge Julius N. Richardson, an appointee of President Trump, and Judge G. Steven Agee, a former President George W. Bush appointee, were in the majority. Judge Robert B. King, an appointee of former President Clinton, dissented. 'Contrary to the panel majority, the district court did exactly what it was obliged to do. Specifically, in its thorough and cogent Opinion, the district court separately assessed the plaintiffs' likelihood of success on the contested merits issues — i.e., whether the plaintiffs possess Article III standing to pursue their APA claim, whether there was a final agency action for purposes of APA jurisdiction, whether the APA claim is otherwise precluded by the existence of an adequate remedy under the Privacy Act, and whether the Privacy Act's need-to-know exception renders lawful the disclosure of personally identifiable information to DOGE,' King wrote in his dissent.
