Apple & Volkswagen Reportedly In Talks Over CarPlay Integration

carplay 640x359When Apple officially unveiled CarPlay earlier this year, there were many car manufacturers who were onboard and are expected to feature Apple’s technology in future car models. At the same time, there are some manufacturers who were not listed, and one of them is Volkswagen.

However according to recent reports, Volkswagen is said to be in talks with Apple and are expected to make an announcement later this year, assuming that the talks go well and both companies are in agreement with each other.

According to people familiar with the matter, the talks are currently underway and if successful, would see Apple’s CarPlay technology make its way into Volkswagen’s 2016 vehicle models. Apparently this is because Volkswagen had missed the opportunity to get the technology into their 2015 lineup for whatever reason, so we guess 2016’s models will be the earliest we can expect it.

Given that Apple is also reportedly updating CarPlay to allow for Bluetooth connectivity alongside a physical connection via the Lightning cable, it would no doubt be to Volkswagen’s advantage as they would be getting the latest CarPlay. In any case take it with a grain of salt for now, but check back with us later this year for more details.

Apple & Volkswagen Reportedly In Talks Over CarPlay Integration

, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

EchoWear Brings Song Identification To Android Wear Devices

echowear 640x409While Android Wear devices like the LG G Watch and Samsung Gear Live are slowly starting to make its way to customers, we’re starting to see more apps make its way onto the platform. However what makes these otherwise normal apps different is that they are designed to run on smartwatches which are constantly on our wrist, thus saving us time from having to get our phone out.

A good example would be the EchoWear app. This app has been designed for the Android Wear platform and it is basically the equivalent of Shazam or Soundhound for your wrist. For those who aren’t familiar with Shazam or Soundhound, it basically has the ability to listen to a snippet of a song and identify it for you.

EchoWear does the same thing and it uploads its findings to Gracenote who will then return the results on your smartwatch. The app can also be launched via voice command, thus making it even more convenient, so users will be able to quickly identify songs before it ends. The app was developed by XDA Recognized Developer, kevdliu, and for those interested in learning more, head on over to the XDA forums or the Google Play Store for the download.

EchoWear Brings Song Identification To Android Wear Devices

, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Google+ Ditches Requirement For Real Names

Google Plus Logo 640x313When Google+ was first launched, it required users to use their real name. In a way this made sense since we’re sure we’d like to know who we are interacting with, right? However we guess there are some who are particularly concerned about their privacy and would rather not use their real names.

Well the good news is that if you have been holding out on Google+ for this feature, you will be pleased to learn that Google has recently announced that Google+ users who don’t want to use their real names will be able to do so.

According to Google, “Over the years, as Google+ grew and its community became established, we steadily opened up this policy, from allowing +Page owners to use any name of their choosing to letting YouTube users bring their usernames into Google+. Today, we are taking the last step: there are no more restrictions on what name you can use.”

The use of real names has been somewhat contentious because like we said, some people just wish to remain anonymous due to privacy concerns, not to mention the possibility of being able to be searched is probably a concern as well, especially when it comes to employers who are trying to find out more about an employee. In any case what do you guys think of the new changes made to Google+? A little too late, perhaps?

Google+ Ditches Requirement For Real Names

, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

The Convergence of Medical and Consumer Health Apps

By Paul Bennett

2014-07-15-shutterstock_183488225.jpg

[CAPTION: Image via Shutterstock]

Consumer healthcare apps linked to smartphones or wearable devices are growing in popularity, and forthcoming offerings from Apple and Google are likely to draw more attention to the field. These systems allow users to monitor a range of information–heart rate, calories burned, distance walked–but they don’t guarantee a change in behavior, much less an improvement in health.

Still, many doctors and clinicians see great potential for mobile medical apps. According to an April article in Modern Healthcare, 2013 “saw the beginning of convergence between devices and apps used by clinicians and those used by consumers.” In the future, experts see the integration of consumer apps and devices into “a comprehensive healthcare and wellness information system,” that could enable medical professionals to help patients manage their health, according to the report.

The ubiquity of smartphones and tablets is creating opportunities for that to happen, but hurdles remain, including the as-yet-uncertain regulatory demands on those who create and deploy apps that not only take measurements but actually prescribe a course of action for a patient.

When used in a clinical setting monitored by physicians, mobile apps are already leading to improved health. In a recent cardiac rehabilitation program at the Mayo Clinic, patients who used a smartphone-based app developed by the clinic to record daily measurements such as blood pressure, weight, blood sugar levels, minutes of physical activity, and dietary habits over a three-month period were less likely to be readmitted to the hospital within 90 days of discharge, compared with those patients who followed a traditional regime. The app also provided educational materials that would formerly have been provided via books, CDs, and DVDs. The interactive nature of the process led to improved results.

The cardiac rehab app was developed by the Clinic’s cardiology team in tandem with Dallas-based Healarium. “They had the proper platform already set up,” says R. Jay Widmer, an M.D./Ph.D. who oversaw the program at the Mayo Clinic. “We were able to integrate our requirements, so the task of setting it up wasn’t onerous.”

“Physicians are embracing the trend,” says Widmer, “but there still isn’t enough data on digital health. This program was very specific to the Mayo Clinic and to what we do. I knew it would be successful because of that. But I don’t have the same level of trust for mainstream apps.”

The Mayo Clinic’s digital health efforts extend beyond cardiac rehabilitation. Doctors there are working on digital health efforts in internal medicine, general health, musculoskeletal, and pediatric care. “The trend is likely to keep expanding,” says Widmer. “Digital certainly has the capability to do a lot, but we’re going to need more data to have widespread implementation.”

Among the many benefits digital medicine confers is the ability to extend the reach of doctors. The Mayo Clinic has a number of satellite offices, and mobile apps allow patients even hundreds of miles away to check in with physicians. This isn’t just a matter of rural areas; even urban areas can be underserved, says Widmer–but increased use of smartphones and better outreach from hospitals is beginning to change that.

More innovations are emerging at the Center for Digital Health Innovation at the University of California, San Francisco. It is “an oasis of agility,” created to spur a range of innovations from sensor development to consumer-facing self-management apps, enterprise technologies that support research and clinical care, and Big Data analytics, according to Aenor Sawyer, M.D., Associate Director of Strategic Relations.

Four large projects underway at the center include: CareWeb, a “Care-team collaborative platform that uses social and mobile communications technology built on Salesforce.com;” Tidepool, which is building the infrastructure for a new generation of smart diabetes apps; Health eHeart, “a clinical trials platform using social media, mobile technology, and novel real-time sensors to revolutionize heart disease;” and Trinity, which provides “precision team care by integrating patient data with multidisciplinary input and evidence” via secure online collaboration for virtual tumor board and case conferences.

“With Health eHeart,” says Sawyer, “we’ve been able to leverage social media, data aggregating platforms, and remote activity and physiologic sensing, to extend the reach of clinical research. Participants can go online, create a profile, provide their history, and update their outcomes. They can also send genomic information back to us through a ‘spit kit.’ It has rapidly increased patient recruitment by magnitudes over traditional methods, at a fraction of the cost.”

For the Health eHeart, which combines a Web-based program with a mobile app, the center partnered with sensor maker AliveCor to offer remote access to electrocardiography; physiological sensor company iHealth; and Ginger.io, which helped create an aggregating dashboard and patient portal.

The center’s CareWeb “is putting into a single secure platform all the ways we communicate as a care team in the hospital–phone, e-mail, voice, text, medical records,” says Sawyer. “There will also be a portal so the patient and designated family can access the information, making them part of the care team.”

Many of these projects ultimately become products, available to other centers and consumers, says Sawyer. “Our frontline innovations undergo extensive evaluation during development and after implementation.” Once we have shown, through proof-of-concept testing, that they are effective in care and cost, I feel we are obligated to get these solutions scaled up and out of the university, into the world to provide greater benefit.”

Original article published on Techonomy.com.

Individualized Cancer Treatment Coming — But Only If Underdogs Prevail

By Meredith Salisbury

2014-07-15-shutterstock_139366595.jpg

[CAPTION: Image via Shutterstock]

Decades ago, “personalized medicine” meant “don’t give penicillin to the person who is fatally allergic to it.” Today, the phrase is shorthand for the ambitious but achievable concept of targeting medications to a specific group of people, based on genetic information, disease progression, biomarkers, and other factors. Still, there’s a small but growing force in the biomedical community that takes the notion of “personalized medicine” much further. For them the term is used literally–they aim for treatment options custom-crafted for the unique snowflakes that we are.

The dream of individualized treatment is a non-starter under current economic and regulatory models for drug development. Estimates of how much it costs on average to bring a drug to market–from earliest drug discovery to assembling teams of experts to review pricey clinical trials–range from $1 billion to about $5 billion. It’s expensive in terms of time, too: 10 to 15 years to successfully launch an individual drug. To put that in depressing perspective, the time and money required for each new therapeutic undertaken by a conventional pharmaceutical company is roughly equivalent to what it took to complete the Human Genome Project.

Naturally, people seeking to get away from the blockbuster drugs of big pharma also envision getting away from its intrinsic costs. Veterans of drug development often reply that a new therapeutic costs just as much and takes just as long whether it works for one person or 1 billion people; the cheaper-faster-better mantra hasn’t made a dent in their industry.

Through that lens, attempts to develop custom-tailored medications or treatment plans for a single person may seem quixotic. But if some new approaches prove successful, we all stand to benefit.

Andrew Hessel’s Pink Army Cooperative is a nonprofit biotech organization founded in 2009 to design completely customized, virus-based cancer treatments–and then provide them at no cost, so long as patients agree to share medical data about their experience with the community. Each treatment is based on a sample of that patient’s cancer cells, which are screened against possible therapies to find ones that eradicate cancer but leave healthy cells intact. Hessel spoke at the recent Techonomy Bio conference about his ideas.

Another example is a company called N-of-One (the name is a reference to the number of people in a clinical trial, usually referred to as “n”; an n of 1 means there’s only one person being studied). Launched in 2008 and also focused on cancer, N-of-One works with medical providers and diagnostic companies to deliver custom profiles and interpretations of each patient’s tumor. That information is merged with data about therapies, including those in ongoing clinical trials, to design a tailored treatment plan for the patient.

In hospitals and clinical research institutes, the custom approach has gotten a boost from animals called “avatars.” These organisms are developed to mirror a person’s tumor or disease, to evaluate the effects of treatment options and study disease progression. Fruit flies can be injected with cells from a patient’s tumor and then exposed to various medications to see which ones shrink that tumor. Just a handful of these fly avatars have been made across the globe, but promising results might turn them into a mainstay of personalized medicine. Mice have also been avatars: On a mission to understand his young daughter’s one-of-a-kind syndrome, clinical geneticist Hugh Rienhoff worked with scientists to recreate her particular genetic variant in mice. In addition to helping assess treatment options, these mice can shed light on how Rienhoff’s daughter’s disease may progress in the future.

Even if all of these efforts succeed, though, it remains unclear how regulatory agencies will respond to individualized treatments. Many public health officials have been champions of personalized medicine (check out this recent blog post from the CDC’s director of the Office of Public Health Genomics), but good intentions are unlikely to make for a smooth transition from current requirements. Clinical trials, for instance, are a necessary cornerstone of the FDA’s review process; but therapies for just one person by definition cannot be tested on lots of other people to ensure they’re safe and effective.

There is no doubt that personalized medicine is gaining traction in the biomedical industry–but just how personalized treatments will get, and how soon, remains to be seen. In the meantime, stakeholders around the world should be joining the conversation, lobbying legislators and regulatory agencies to pave the way for individualized treatments, and educating themselves about alternatives to traditional drug development. Only if demand soars, and resources follow, will these upstarts get their big chance.

Original article published on Techonomy.com.

Bringing Your Passion to Work

Think about when you’ve fallen in love in your life or the first time you held your newborn child in your arms. The colors looked brighter, the sounds were clearer, and it felt like your heart was going to burst with love and joy. (Hopefully you’ve had this experience in your life at some point so you know what I’m are talking about!)

It is possible to bring that kind of energy into our work too. This is when we are truly engaged at work.
2014-07-15-shutterstock_FC00059.jpg
When we know what we are passionate about, only then we can reach our full potential. If you think about the words job and passion, which one would you rather spend your time on?

• Tapping into the power of passion is essential to being able to accomplish what you want with yourself and with your company.

• Getting others to feel that same passion and add their personal passions is what energizes a group of people to greatness.

• It is released when the people are “emotionally and intellectually excited by the firm’s vision and values.” Passion is a much more powerful energy than that fear, dread, or boredom.

A job has become synonymous with drudgery, a drag; something you have–not want–to do, and it drains your energy.

Having a passion for your work is energizing, something you are looking forward to, that you cannot wait to dive into to, and it makes you happy.

When passion is strong and it is identified and understood, it is possible to harness that energy to create great things and have a big impact in the world. This is true on all levels of our world–individual, family, company, national and world (although we have yet to reach this ideal so far).

Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Ghandi are two examples of leaders who made a huge impact because of their passion to make the world a better place. If you look at any successful company, the founders tend to be great leaders who had both passion and vision.

Tony Collins, CEO of Virgin Trains, discovered the passion of his people in a very traditional industry. He shares:

“What is remarkable about our experience in trains is how the same people who delivered the service under British Rail and were seen to be largely cold and disinterested toward the passen¬gers are the same people who now deliver indus¬try leading customer service, so the passion was always there. It had been suppressed, devalued, destroyed by a command and control structure driven by process, status and fear. All we had to do was release it.”

What overall organizational energy do you have in your company right now?

Here are five questions you can ask yourself to figure out how to bring more passion to your work:
1. What do I love to do?
2. How can I be the best version of myself at work?
3. What gives me energy or makes me feel excited?
4. When have I felt the most joy at work?
5. How can I bring this into my work?

Donald Trump is known for saying if you’re going to think, you may as well think big. It’s that big thinking that comes from being passionate.
2014-07-15-shutterstock_FC00082.jpg

Passion is when the fires within ignite. Passion in work turns it into play, something that you love to do. It is the unseen power of any organization and truly inspiring leaders know how to tap into it.

Petition To Reinstate Marijuana Scientist Gets Thousands Of Signatures

A petition demanding that the University of Arizona reinstate a research scientist fired after she won federal approval to study marijuana for military veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder has received more than 27,000 signatures.

Dr. Suzanne Sisley, a Department of Psychiatry faculty member and researcher at the school, was suddenly terminated last week for reasons she maintains were related to her research. She won federal approval in April for the long-delayed veterans study, when the Department of Health and Human Services signed off on the project.

Ricardo Pereyda, an Iraq war veteran with PTSD who said he’s been treating his symptoms with marijuana since 2010, started the Change.org petition to reinstate Sisley, which had nearly 28,000 signatures Tuesday night.

“The university must reinstate Dr. Sisley, providing her with the necessary space and resources she needs to conduct her research,” Pereyda wrote in the petition. “Her study could mean life or death for many veterans. ‘Bigger Questions, Better Answers, Bear Down,’ is the Wildcat motto. Demand that President Hart and the University of Arizona live up to it.”

In an interview with the news site Vice this week, Sisley said political pressure from Arizona lawmakers cost her the job.

“I am a lifelong Republican, and I am very conservative,” Sisley told Vice. “This is going to make me sound like a liberal but I’ll say it: members of the right-wing legislature in Arizona have never accepted the fact that the voters approved medical marijuana in Arizona in 2010. They’re furious and they’ve made attempts year after year to repeal the medical marijuana law, but they can’t.”

The University of Arizona said it doesn’t comment on personnel issues, but denied that her firing had anything to do with her research. The university released a statement to CNN, saying that “in 2013, the UA championed state legislation to ensure that universities could perform medical marijuana research on campus. The UA has not received political pressure to terminate any employee.”

Sisley said she’s skeptical of that position.

“The University of Arizona can say whatever they want about their love of pot research but the proof is in their inaction, not their words,” Sisley told The Daily Beast.

Sisley blamed the loss of her job on Arizona politicians, including state Sen. Kimberley Yee, who blocked funds for the state medical marijuana program that would have studied medicinal use of cannabis for PTSD. Yee wanted the funds directed to drug-prevention education. Sisley also accused state Senate President Andy Biggs (R), of trying to thwart her marijuana research.

The Department of Veterans Affairs said in a 2012 report that nearly 30 percent of veterans who served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars suffer from PTSD. Scientists have speculated that marijuana could help veterans suffering from PTSD symptoms, including anxiety, flashbacks and depression. An estimated 7.7 million adult Americans live with the condition.

While 23 states have legalized marijuana for medical use, fewer than a dozen of them allow doctors to recommend medical marijuana for PTSD-related symptoms. Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, which classifies cannabis as one of the “most dangerous” substances with “no currently accepted medical use.”

Sisley’s study aimed to examine the effects of five different potencies of smoked or vaporized cannabis on 50 veterans who have PTSD.

“My sole focus over the last four years is how do we help our vets who are coming back in droves with PTSD that is treatment-resistant — how do we help these folks?” Sisley told CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta in an interview Monday. “No one is saying [marijuana] is a cure, but it does seem to be effective for symptom control and the notion that there’s a potential that a plant could reduce the human suffering of these vets and yet it’s being forced to sit on a shelf and not be tested rigorously is an abomination.”

California Water Fines Loom Over Wasteful Residents Amid Historic Drought

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California water regulators voted Tuesday to approve fines up to $500 a day for residents who waste water on lawns, landscaping and car washing, as a report showed that consumption throughout the state has actually risen amid the worst drought in nearly four decades.

The action by the State Water Resources Control Board came after its own survey showed that conservation measures to date have failed to achieve the 20 percent reduction in water use sought by Gov. Jerry Brown. Survey results released before the 4-0 vote showed water consumption throughout California had actually jumped by 1 percent this past May compared with the same month in previous years.

The fines will apply only to wasteful outdoor watering, including watering landscaping to the point that runoff flows onto sidewalks, washing a vehicle without a nozzle on the hose, or hosing down sidewalks and driveways.

“Our goal here is to light a fire under those who aren’t yet taking the drought seriously,” water board Chairwoman Felicia Marcus said in an interview after the vote.

She called the vote historic, not only because the steps are unprecedented in California but because the board is trying to spread the burden of the drought beyond farmers and agencies that are trying to protect wildlife.

She said city and suburban residents are not fully aware of the seriousness of the three-year drought — the worst in California since the mid-1970s.

“We’re all in this together,” Marcus said. “This is our attempt to say … this is the least that urban Californians can do.”

The board estimates the restrictions, which take effect in early August, could save enough water statewide to supply more than 3.5 million people for a year.

Cities and water districts were given wide latitude on how the fines will be implemented. The full $500-a-day fine, considered an infraction, could be reserved for repeat violators, for example. Others might receive warnings or smaller fines based on a sliding scale.

The rules include exemptions for public health and safety, such as allowing cities to power-wash alleyways to get rid of human waste left by homeless people, to scrub away graffiti, and to remove oil and grease from parking structure floors.

If fines fail to promote conservation, Marcus said the board would consider other steps such as requiring water districts to stop leaks in their pipes, which account for an estimated 10 percent of water use, stricter landscape restrictions and encouraging water agencies to boost rates for consumers who use more than their share of water.

Even with the leeway granted to local governments and water districts, some managers were unhappy with the board’s action.

Mark Madison, general manager of the Elk Grove Water District south of Sacramento, said the steps will unnecessarily punish customers who already have reduced consumption. Residents in his district have cut water use by more than 18 percent since last year.

“What you’re asking me to do right now is to thank them with a sledgehammer,” he told the board.

The increased usage noted in the report is attributable to two regions of the state: Southern California coastal communities and the far northeastern slice of the state. It was not immediately clear why consumption had increased in those areas.

No region of California met Brown’s request for a 20 percent reduction, but some came closer than others. Communities that draw from the Sacramento River reduced consumption the most, by 13 percent, while those along the North Coast reduced consumption by 12 percent.

San Francisco Bay Area and Southern California cities that draw from the Colorado River decreased water use by 5 percent.

Cities and suburbs use about 20 percent of the state’s water, with about half going outdoors. Agriculture is by far the greatest water user, accounting for 75 percent of consumption in the state.

California farmers are just as guilty of using too much water as their urban neighbors, according to a separate report released Tuesday. The study by the University of California, Davis, found that some farmers could see their wells run dry next year unless the state sees a wet winter.

Snowden, Go Home

Edward Snowden, leaker extraordinaire of classified NSA documents, is said to be seeking an extension of his political asylum in Russia, where he has resided, beyond the reach of US jurisdiction and under legal protection granted by Vladimir Putin personally, for a little over one year. Snowden seems to be settling in for the long haul as a fugitive expatriate.

He is making a mistake. At some point Snowden must return to the US and face the criminal charges pending against him. By postponing this reckoning, he adds to skepticism about his motives. More important, he diminishes his legitimacy as a whistleblower who broke the law to expose government overreaching, change official policy, and vindicate principles of government transparency and individual privacy.

Snowden has portrayed his accessing, copying and distribution (to selected journalists) of NSA records as acts of conscience-and so they may have been. Civil disobedience is a time-honored form of protest, particularly in a democracy. But civil disobedience is not painless; it is not a get-out-of-jail free card.

Civil disobedience assumes-in fact, requires-submission to legal processes: to trial and possible punishment. This, the painful part of civil disobedience, is what distinguishes morally-just protest, on one hand, from mere law-breaking, on the other. Think of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Think also of James Risen, a New York Times reporter who faces sanctions, including jail, for his civil disobedience in defying a court order. Risen has been waging a legal battle to protect his confidential sources for a book revealing classified information on US intelligence operations in Iran. Having appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, to no avail, Risen has run out of legal options (although the Justice Department has hinted that it might back off of enforcing its subpoena demanding Risen’s testimony about confidential sources).

Snowden’s situation and Risen’s are very similar. Both Snowden and Risen are in trouble for disclosing classified information. Snowden has been indicted, while Risen is subject to a court order (that remains intact after multiple appeals). Snowden has fled the country, escaping (at least for now) any legal consequences for his actions. The morally equivalent choice for Risen would be to renege on his promise of confidentiality and to provide sworn testimony to government prosecutors.

The likelihood of Risen, a principled and professional journalist, betraying his source to avoid jail–is zero. For Snowden, too, the moral choice is clear. To legitimize his violations of federal law as acts of conscience, he needs to face the consequences, not run away from them.

If Snowden, instead of going public with his information, had decided to leak his NSA documents on a confidential basis to journalists at The Guardian and the Washington Post, those journalists would today be in the same boat as the New York Times’ Risen-under subpoena and facing prison or other serious sanctions for refusing to comply. Why, then, should the expectations be so different for Snowden?

Snowden no doubt fears going to prison. Who wouldn’t? But Snowden, if he returned to the US, would receive a trial that is not only fair, but a model of due process. Media interest would be off the charts. That would maximize transparency in all court proceedings–which, in turn, would pressure prosecutors to exercise restraint.

Snowden would have the very best criminal defense lawyers in the country (regardless of his ability to pay them). And those lawyers would make the most of the government’s dilemma: having to prove harm to national security, but without revealing sensitive information that could cause still more harm to national security.

Snowden’s lawyers will also insist that he cease all public comments. No more press conferences via Skype, no Twitter or email, no calls with reporters. Total silence, giving his lawyers control over his message and image. For Snowden, who clearly loves the sound of his own voice and delights in dealings with the media, such muzzling may be hard to abide. Still, it’s not a reason for staying on the lam.

Snowden’s unfinished business is in a US courtroom, not a Moscow suburb.
—–
Peter Scheer is executive director of the nonprofit First Amendment Coalition. The views expressed here are Scheer’s alone; they do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FAC’s Directors.

Alan Grayson To Force Republicans On The Record On Minimum Wage

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) proposed an amendment to a House spending bill Tuesday that would raise the minimum wage for federal government workers. A roll call vote on the amendment, scheduled Wednesday, will force Republicans to go on the record opposing a living wage for federal employees.

Grayson pitched a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour for federal employees, which he said was “still a very modest amount.” He said the U.S. government should set an example for business owners. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25.

“This amendment would end the federal government’s practice of paying poverty wages to its workers, and hopefully set an example for the private sector to stop paying poverty wages to its workers,” Grayson said on the House floor.

The amendment would remove the lowest pay grades for federal workers, forcing them into higher pay categories.

“A fair day’s work should result in a fair day’s pay,” Grayson said, adding that current wages force some federal employees to take multiple jobs, potentially reducing the quality of their work.

After the amendment failed in a voice vote Tuesday night, Grayson requested a roll call vote, which was postponed until Wednesday. In an interview with The Huffington Post, Grayson said the roll call will force House members — including those who repeatedly vote against measures that would improve conditions in poor home districts — to go on the record to oppose a livable wage.

“The Republicans have been ducking a vote on the minimum wage all year long, in the same way they’ve been ducking votes” on other key issues, like immigration reform, Grayson said in an interview. “I saw an opportunity to force a vote on the minimum wage, and I took advantage.”

Grayson said the tea party has been “dictating” what the Republican-led House votes on. “And that’s to the detriment of the national interest,” he said. What the nation will benefit from, he explained, is boosting the minimum wage for the working poor, a move that could “elevate the entire economy.”

“What we’ll see here is if we pay people fairly, we’re not only doing the moral thing … but we’re also doing the thing that will help everyone overall,” he added.

Grayson also responded to criticism from Rep. Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), who said on the House floor that the wording of Grayson’s amendment meant federal employees at the lowest pay grades wouldn’t be paid. Grayson said the assertion was “nonsensical.”

“If we eliminate the lowest paying grades, then these workers will simply be paid more,” Grayson explained. “That’s an obvious, common sense reading of the provision.

View the text of the amendment below:

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5016, AS REPORTED

OFFERED BY MR. GRAYSON OF FLORIDA

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

SEC.___. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to pay any individual at an annual rate of Grade 1, Steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6; or Grade 2 Step 1 or 2 as defined in the “Salary Table 2014-GS” published by the Office of Personnel Management. Further, none of the funds made available by this Act may be used to pay any individual at an hourly basic rate of Grade 1, Steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6; or Grade 2, Step 1 or 2.