Reed: U.S. Should Avoid Unnecessary War

WASHINGTON, DC – As the Trump Administration continues to weigh military action against Iran, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, says going to war with Iran could be a strategic misstep and is urging the Trump Administration to level with the American people about the true risks and costs of U.S. military action.

Reed notes the U.S. military could devastate Iran’s armed forces, but the president has failed to make a case to Congress or the American people about what would follow. Ahead of an expected Iran war powers resolution vote in Congress next week, Senator Reed stated:

“If war is unnecessary, it should be avoided. President Trump’s saber-rattling for war with Iran is taking the country down a dangerous path without a clear strategy or endgame and putting U.S. national security at considerable risk.

“The president barely mentioned Iran during the longest State of the Union speech in history. He failed to define the objective. Congress has received no real briefings or intelligence, and it is hard to justify action without rationale.

“The Iranian regime’s violence, support for terrorist proxies and other malign actors across the region, and its expanding ballistic missile arsenal are unacceptable. These are serious, destabilizing threats that demand resolute responses from the U.S. and our allies. But President Trump’s decision to abandon the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, weakness in securing an alternative, and his self-inflicted isolation from key U.S. allies has made this situation worse. He dismantled a functioning constraint and now implies that military force alone can substitute for strategy.

“Today, with two carrier strike groups and significant air and naval assets deployed in the region at levels unseen since the run-up to the Iraq War, the administration has not presented Congress or the American people with any coherent legal or strategic justification for preemptive strikes. The president is the Commander-In-Chief, but Congress alone holds the constitutional authority to authorize war. That responsibility cannot be bypassed; it must be exercised through transparency, consultation, and a vote.”


Ricketts Urges Prudential Regulators to Improve the Ability of Smaller Banks to Participate in the Mortgage Market at Senate Banking Hearing

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) participated in a Senate Banking Committee hearing where he advocated for regulatory relief for Nebraska’s financial institutions through bank capital modernization, emphasizing the critical role of relationship-based mortgage lending in localand rural communities. During the hearing, Ricketts focused on the negative impact of the current Basel III Mortgage Servicing Assets (MSA) capital requirements on smaller financial institutions. These capital rules directly impact their ability to originate new mortgage loans and retain mortgage servicing for existing customers.

“In Nebraska, our banking system is built around regional and community banks and credit unions, not big banks,” said Senator Ricketts. “They underwrite equipment purchases for farmers and extend working capital to small manufacturers and main street retailers. For many Nebraskan families, they are the institution that helps with a first mortgage, a home construction loan, or refinancing after a job change…Raising the cap for MSAs helps ensure a more orderly and liquid MSA market for all participants and brings more stability in the single-family mortgage market.”

Watch the video HERE.

Ricketts’ comments were made in the hearing Senate Banking Committee: “Update from the Prudential Regulators: Rightsizing Regulation to Promote American Opportunity.” The witnesses were: Hon. Michelle Bowman, Vice Chair for Supervision, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; Mr. Travis Hill, Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Hon. Jonathan Gould, Comptroller, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; and Hon. Kyle Hauptmann, Chairman, National Credit Union Administration.

Background


Risch Condemns U.S. District Court Ruling to Lower Hydropower Generation on Columbia River System

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho) issues the following statement condemning a ruling by a U.S. District Court on Wednesday impacting hydropower operations on the Columbia River system.

“Once again, an activist judge is trying to dismantle the infrastructure Idahoans rely on by legislating from the bench,” said Risch. “Congress authorized these dams, and only Congress has the authority to determine how they are managed. This decision disregards the essential role the lower Snake River dams play in our communities, and I will continue fighting to protect these vital resources.”

The Columbia River System provides multiple benefits to Idaho and the region, including clean hydropower, economic stimulus, risk management, and crop irrigation.


Schatz, Hirono Lead Resolution Celebrating Mahina ‘Ōlelo Hawai‘i

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) and Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawai‘i) introduced a resolution celebrating Mahina ‘Olelo Hawai‘i, also known as Hawaiian Language Month.

“This February, we celebrate Mahina ‘Olelo Hawai‘i and the people, schools, and programs that work every day to preserve the Hawaiian language and culture,” said Senator Schatz, vice chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. “The resurgence of the Hawaiian language not only serves as a model for Indigenous communities around the world, but also as an example of the strength and resilience of the Native Hawaiian Community.”

“Mahina Olelo Hawaii, Hawaiian Language month, serves as a testament to the resilience of the Native Hawaiian community and the importance of Hawaiian history and culture,” said Senator Hirono. “Despite laws and practices that banned Olelo Hawaii from being taught in schools or used in official governing documents—nearly driving it to extinction—the Native Hawaiian community kept their language alive and today it is flourishing. Indigenous languages are a critical part of American history that cannot be erased. I am proud to join my colleagues in reintroducing this resolution to celebrate Mahina Olelo Hawaii, and I will keep advocating for the preservation of Native Hawaiian language and culture.”

Schatz, who serves as vice chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, has authored several laws promoting Native languages, including the Native American Language Resource Center Act, which awarded a consortium led by the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo with $6.6 million to establish the first National Native American Language Resource Center. The federal funding is providing resources to foster collaboration and promote the use of Native American languages across the country.

“As we celebrate Mahina ?Olelo Hawai‘i, we acknowledge not only the revitalization of ?olelo Hawai?i, but also the hard work that our community has put into both preserving and renormalizing the Hawaiian language over the past 40 years,” said Ka?iu Kimura, Director of the UH Hilo Hawai?i ?Imiloa Institute and UH Hilo’s Ka Haka ?Ula O Ke?elikolani College of Hawaiian Language. “Without this work, and the mana?o shared by those who have maintained and uplifted ?olelo Hawai?i, our language would not be as flourishing as it is today. Mahina ?Olelo Hawai‘i is both a celebration and a reminder that it is our responsibility to share our mana?o not only with the next generation of Hawaiian language learners, but with other Native American and Alaska Native communities to help them uplift their own ?olelo ?oiwi (Indigenous languages).”

The resolution text is available here.

###


AMID CHAOS, CONFUSION, & OUTRAGE OVER PROPOSED ICE MASS DETENTION FACILITY IN ORANGE COUNTY, SCHUMER, RYAN DEMAND ANSWERS AND INVESTIGATION INTO DHS MISMANGEMENT IN THE HUDSON VALLEY

Local Leaders Unlawfully Denied Answers To Basic Questions As DHS Contradicts Itself And Refuses To Be Transparent On What Its Plans Are In Orange County – Reps Say We Can’t Rely On Words Through Anonymous Sources, We Need To Be Certain This Mass Detention Facility Will Not Move Forward

Schumer & Ryan Demand An End To The Secrecy And Concrete Answers On What DHS’s Plans Are; Reps Call For An Independent Investigation From Watchdog Into DHS’s Disastrous Management In Orange County

Schumer, Ryan: No ICE Mass Detention Facility In Orange County

After weeks of chaos, secrecy, and changing stories surrounding ICE’s plans for a mass detention facility in Orange County, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer and U.S. Congressman Pat Ryan today demanded answers and an investigation into U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) disastrous management in Orange County.

Schumer and Ryan are now calling for the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to investigate this massive mismanagement and lack of transparency amid overwhelming community opposition.

“Since day one, the community has been united in stopping the Trump administration’s unwanted plan for an ICE mass detention facility in Orange County. DHS’s management in the Hudson Valley has been an abject disaster, shrouded in chaos, secrecy, and confusion. Federal leaders’ inquiries are ignored. Local leaders are denied answers. Nobody can get a straight answer on whether they’re moving forward,” said Senator Schumer. “DHS keeps changing its story and clearly can’t be trusted. We are demanding concrete answers and an investigation into DHS’s actions in Orange County because this is unacceptable. Nobody supports this plan. Orange County leaders and residents are determined not to let this happen in our community. ICE’s chaos must end.”

“ICE has consistently sent out contradictory information, dismissed the concerns of local residents and elected officials, and repeatedly ignored our Requests for Information. This level of gross mismanagement is beyond unacceptable and ends now. We’re demanding answers on whether the facility is truly gone for good, and we’re demanding an investigation into how the hell the Administration came to this dangerous and Un-American decision in the first place,” said Congressman Pat Ryan. “Not a single elected official – Democrat or Republican – supports this plan, nor were they briefed on it at any point. We don’t want armed, masked agents on our streets. We don’t want a mass detention facility. We want answers, and ICE has a duty to provide them. With Senator Schumer’s support and our entire community behind me, we are not giving up this fight.”

Schumer and Ryan have both vehemently opposed the proposed plan to build an immigrant mass detention center in the former Pep Boys warehouse in Chester and are now demanding concrete and detailed answers regarding ICE’s plan. Local leaders, both Democrat and Republican, have overwhelmingly opposed the plan and repeatedly said nobody from the federal government has reached out to explain plans for the warehouse. ICE had given contradicting stories, such as falsely claiming that it had purchased the warehouse earlier this month, only to retract that statement.

Senator Schumer has been leading efforts in Congress to rein in ICE and impose reforms. He and his colleagues have called for clear guardrails, including prohibiting enforcement at sensitive locations like schools and courts, requiring officers to display identification, banning the use of masks during enforcement, preventing racial profiling, mandating body-worn cameras, ensuring access to counsel in detention facilities, and strengthening oversight and coordination with state and local authorities. Schumer said federal immigration agents cannot continue to cause chaos in communities without accountability and that Congress must act to protect constitutional rights while ensuring common-sense enforcement.

A copy of Schumer and Ryan’s letter to DHS Inspector General Cuffari can be found HERE or below:

Dear Inspector General Cuffari,

We write to demand answers and an investigation into U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s proposed purchase of a vacant warehouse located at 29 Elizabeth Drive, 10918 in the Village of Chester, New York, for use as an immigration detention facility.

Let us say it plainly from the start: our community strongly rejects this proposal. We are not aware of a single local elected official – Democrat or Republican – who supports this plan. Local leaders have repeatedly said they were not briefed substantively at any point.

Since our offices first learned of this plan through public reporting and constituent outreach—not through any communication from ICE—the process has been plagued by contradictory and inaccurate statements from federal officials, a complete lack of transparency, and overwhelming community opposition. Communication with our offices has been equally unacceptable. In December, in his official capacity as a member of the United States House of Representatives, Congressman Ryan sent ICE a request for information demanding answers about the proposed Chester facility. After nearly a month’s delay, ICE refused to provide any information. In addition, our community’s petition opposing the Chester facility has continued to grow, and hundreds of local residents have gathered peacefully at meetings to express their opposition—yet bipartisan local officials have still heard nothing from ICE.

These failures raise serious concerns that warrant immediate independent review by the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General.

To date, the community has received no clear or consistent information regarding the status or development of the proposed detention center. ICE initially told multiple media outlets that it had already purchased the warehouse, presenting the project as a settled fact. Almost immediately, that claim unraveled. County property records showed no sale, no deed transfer, and no filings of any kind. Local officials publicly confirmed they had never been contacted by ICE and described the supposed purchase as a rumor. Only after sustained public scrutiny did ICE reverse course, issuing a late-night statement admitting that its original claim was false and had been sent “without proper approval.”

In the span of a single week, ICE went from asserting ownership of a detention site, to being unable to substantiate that claim, to fully retracting it—leaving residents and local governments in the dark about whether the project was abandoned, paused, or continuing behind closed doors.

This is not a minor communications failure. It reflects a disturbing systemic breakdown within DHS and ICE regarding who authorizes major detention decisions, how information is verified before being released, and whether affected communities are owed notice at all. ICE officials falsely claimed they had acquired a detention facility capable of holding up to 1,500 people, sparking public alarm and disrupting local governance. Quietly walking back, that statement without accountability is entirely unacceptable and unbefitting of a federal agency.

This is not a marginal oversight lapse—it is an alarming display of a core governance failure.

As the Inspector General for U.S. Department of Homeland Security, you have a statutory obligation under the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) to investigate allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, and potential conflicts of interest within DHS components, including ICE—particularly where federal funds, procurement decisions, and public accountability are at issue.

We therefore request that your office conduct a comprehensive and independent review examining ICE’s proposed acquisition and development of the facility located at 29 Elizabeth Drive, Chester, New York 10918, including the following:

Verification of property acquisition claims

Investigate whether ICE did in fact purchase or attempted to purchase the facility at 29 Elizabeth Drive, Chester, NY 10918.

Examine property records, deeds, contracts, and any financial transactions.

Accuracy, consistency, and dissemination of public communications

Assess why contradictory or inaccurate statements regarding the facility were issued.

Evaluate whether these misstatements were isolated incidents or reflect a systemic failure in information management.

Transparency and engagement with local communities and stakeholders

Investigate the extent to which ICE communicated with local officials, residents, and other stakeholders prior to announcing the project.

Determine whether the agency violated policies or best practices for informing affected communities about significant enforcement and detention actions.

Assess how the lack of transparency affected public trust and the community’s ability to respond or provide input.

Compliance with procurement, financial, and federal acquisition rules

Determine whether ICE followed federal laws and DHS regulations governing procurement, leasing, and acquisition of real property.

Review use and obligation of federal funds for the proposed project, including approvals, accounting, and documentation.

Examine whether proper audits, reviews, or legal clearances were conducted before public statements were made.

Internal controls, accountability, and oversight mechanisms

Examine whether existing DHS and ICE oversight, auditing, and compliance systems failed to detect or prevent the false statements, lack of transparency, or potential misuse of authority.

Recommend measures to prevent recurrence, strengthen accountability, and ensure transparency in future detention-related decisions.

We respectfully request a written response to our demand that a comprehensive and independent review be conducted of ICE’s proposed acquisition, as outlined in this letter.

###


Scott, Booker reintroduce resolution celebrating Black History Month

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Tim Scott (R-SC) and Cory Booker (D-NJ)celebrated the Senate passage of a bipartisan resolution commemorating Black History Month and the important contributions made by Black Americans throughout United States history.

The resolution recognizes that all Americans benefit from the rich historical legacy of Black culture and recognizes Black History Month as a chance to reflect on the complex history of the nation while also continuing to work toward a more equitable future. Furthermore, the resolution acknowledges the suffering of African Americans during enslavement and the continued racial injustices that remain evident in the United States today. At his recently hosted Black History Month event, Sen. Scott along with U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner held a discussion on the initiatives that are bridging the gap between access and opportunity for historically underserved communities across America.

“Black History Month reminds us that the story of Black Americans is inseparable from the American story itself,” said Sen. Scott. “From the founding of our nation to today, Black Americans have helped shape our culture, strengthened our economy, and defended our freedoms. Their contributions remind us that America’s greatest strength lies in the talents and character of all her citizens.”

“Black History Month is a time for all Americans to honor the courage, contributions, and sacrifices of Black Americans. From building the wealth of our nation to driving innovation and shaping our culture, Black Americans have made our country what it is today, and all of us benefit from their legacy.” said Sen. Booker. “I’m proud to join Senator Scott in this resolution that uplifts Black achievements, confronts ongoing injustices, and inspires future generations to carry forward a legacy of strength, resilience, and unity.”

The resolution is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Raphael Warnock (D‑GA), Maria Cantwell (D‑WA), Ed Markey (D‑MA), Angus King (I‑ME), Brian Schatz (D‑HI), Chris Coons (D‑DE), Chris Van Hollen (D‑MD), Tim Kaine (D‑VA), Jeanne Shaheen (D‑NH), Dick Durbin (D‑IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (D‑NY), Martin Heinrich (D‑NM), Catherine Cortez Masto (D‑NV), Ben Ray Luján (D‑NM), Sheldon Whitehouse (D‑RI), Amy Klobuchar (D‑MN), Jack Reed (D‑RI), Andy Kim (D‑NJ), Ron Wyden (D‑OR), Jeff Merkley (D‑OR), Adam Schiff (D‑CA), Tina Smith (D‑MN), Alex Padilla (D‑CA), Maggie Hassan (D‑NH), Patty Murray (D‑WA), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D‑DE), John Hickenlooper (D‑CO), Jacky Rosen (D‑NV), Mazie Hirono (D‑HI), Tammy Duckworth (D‑IL), Chris Murphy (D‑CT), and Angela Alsobrooks (D‑MD).

To read the full text of the resolution, click here.


Slotkin, Peters Lead Resolution Commemorating Historic Achievements of U.S. Ice Hockey Teams at 2026 Winter Olympics

Resolution Recognizes the Michiganders Whose Contributions Were Critical to Both Teams’ Gold Medal Wins

WASHINGTON, DC — U.S. Senators Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Gary Peters (D-MI) led a resolution commemorating the historic achievements of the U.S. Men’s and Women’s Ice Hockey Teams at the 2026 Olympic Winter Games. The resolution also recognizes the numerous Michiganders on Team USA’s Ice Hockey Teams whose contributions were critical to both teams’ gold medal wins.

“Michigan is Hockey Town, USA! This resolution recognizes this year’s Team USA Ice Hockey players, whose hard-earned victory against Canada showed the world what it means to be a proud Michigander and American,” said Senator Slotkin.

“I’m proud to lead this resolution honoring Team USA’s Ice Hockey Teams for their gold medal wins at the Winter Olympics,” said Senator Peters. “Their historic achievements will be remembered for generations to come, and will no doubt inspire young athletes across our state and nation to pursue their dreams. I am especially proud of the Michiganders on each team who helped bring home these wins, with the final goals at both gold medal games scored by athletes who have called our state home.”

The resolution highlights that this is the first Winter Olympics where both U.S. Ice Hockey Teams have won the gold medal. It is also the first time the U.S. Men’s Ice Hockey Team has won the gold medal since the “Miracle on Ice” at the 1980 Winter Olympics. Team USA’s Men’s and Women’s Ice Hockey Teams both now have three gold medals in their Olympic history.

The resolution specifically recognizes Michiganders:

Megan Keller from Farmington Hills who scored the game winning goal in overtime of the gold medal game.

Goaltender Connor Hellebuyck from Commerce who helped lead Team USA to victory with 41 saves.

Jack Hughes from Canton who scored the game winning goal in overtime of the gold medal game with assists from Zach Werenski from Grosse Pointe Woods and Connor Hellebuyck from Commerce.

Michigander Dylan Larkin from Waterford Township was also on the ice when the U.S. men’s team won the gold medal, and Michiganders Kyle Connor from Shelby Township and Quinn Hughes from Canton also play on the team. Kirsten Simms from Plymouth played a key role for the U.S. women’s team throughout the tournament.

The resolution also recognizes the United States’ record number of 232 athletes participating in the 2026 Olympic Winter Games. Outside of ice hockey, Michiganders brought home 11 medals for Team USA at the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics, the second highest number of medals from any state in the country. This includes gold and silver medals in ice dancing from Madison Chock and Evan Bates, and a bronze medal in two-woman bobsledding from Jasmine Jones. Other Michiganders competing for Team USA at the Milan-Cortina Olympics include snowboarders Nick Baumgartner and Jake Vedder, ice dancers Christina Carreira and Emilea Zingas, and freestyle skiers Winter Vinecki and Kaila Kuhn.

The U.S. Hockey National Team Development Program (NTDP) located in Plymouth, Michigan is the primary hub for elite U.S. hockey training, preparing top youth players for Olympic and National Hockey League (NHL) competition. The USA Hockey Arena in Wayne County hosts year-round ice training, acting as a hotbed for American hockey development.

Slotkin and Peters were joined by U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Andy Kim (D-NJ), and Tina Smith (D-MN) in introducing the resolution.

To view the text of the resolution, click here.

###


Maryland Delegation Members Urge Trump Administration to Declare Oyster Fishery Disaster, Deliver Assistance

Today, the Maryland Congressional Delegation – U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Andy Harris, Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Sarah Elfreth, Johnny Olsewski, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, and April McClain Delaney – expressed support for the State of Maryland’s request for an evaluation of the Maryland oyster fishery for eligibility for a fishery resource disaster designation, and urged U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick to exercise his authority to approve fishery disaster assistance for the Maryland oyster fishery. In their letter, the lawmakers highlighted the adverse weather and market conditions that watermen have faced this year, resulting in a steep decline in the oyster harvest coupled with a significant drop in oyster prices – threatening their livelihoods.

“We write to you as the Maryland Congressional Delegation to urge your favorable consideration of the request from Maryland Governor Wes Moore to conduct an evaluation of the Maryland oyster fishery for eligibility for fishery resource disaster assistance as authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the Fishery Resource Disasters Improvement Act,” Team Maryland began. “Given recent challenges facing the industry – including icy conditions due to the unseasonably cold winter season, recent fishery closures resulting from the Potomac River sewage spill, and overall challenging market conditions – we urge you to declare a fishery disaster and approve fishery resource disaster assistance for the Maryland oyster fishery as soon as possible.”

Underscoring the harmful consequences of these difficult conditions, the lawmakers wrote, “as compared with a five-year average of commercial landings, data from January of 2026 shows a concerning 44% decline in oyster harvest with continued depressed levels of harvest expected this year, while the dockside value of a bushel of oysters has dropped by 66%.”

Regarding the important role of the oyster industry in Maryland’s economy and culture, they continued, “the Maryland oyster fishery is of economic importance to the state, with millions of dollars of commercial landings every year that bolster the Maryland food service and tourism economies, while providing critical income for Maryland watermen. Maryland oysters are also a cornerstone of the rich Chesapeake Bay heritage and are a source of pride for the state, underscoring the importance of the continued operation of the commercial oyster fishery.”

Text of the letter can be viewed here and below.

Dear Secretary Lutnick,

We write to you as the Maryland Congressional Delegation to urge your favorable consideration of the request from Maryland Governor Wes Moore to conduct an evaluation of the Maryland oyster fishery for eligibility for fishery resource disaster assistance as authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the Fishery Resource Disasters Improvement Act. Given recent challenges facing the industry – including icy conditions due to the unseasonably cold winter season, recent fishery closures resulting from the Potomac River sewage spill, and overall challenging market conditions – we urge you to declare a fishery disaster and approve fishery resource disaster assistance for the Maryland oyster fishery as soon as possible.

As Congressman Harris pointed out in his letter to NOAA dated February 4, 2026 (attached), Maryland’s commercial oyster fishery is experiencing an economic crisis. Recent commercial landings point to a significant reduction in oyster harvest in the state, while at the same time prices for oysters are dropping. As compared with a five-year average of commercial landings, data from January 2026 shows a concerning 44% decline in oyster harvest with continued depressed levels of harvest expected this year, while the dockside value of a bushel of oysters has dropped by 66%.

The Maryland oyster fishery is of economic importance to the state, with millions of dollars of commercial landings every year that bolster the Maryland food service and tourism economies, while providing critical income for Maryland watermen. Maryland oysters are also a cornerstone of the rich Chesapeake Bay heritage and are a source of pride for the state, underscoring the importance of the continued operation of the commercial oyster fishery.

Thank you for your urgent attention to this important manner. We stand ready to work with you to support oyster fishery disaster assistance for the Maryland watermen.

Sincerely,


Van Hollen, Markey Demand Hegseth Stop Pressure Campaign Against Anthropic for Refusing to Enable Mass Surveillance and Autonomous Warfare

Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), member of the Appropriations Committee, and Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth urging the Department of Defense (DOD) to drop its week-long intimidation campaign against Anthropic and engage in good-faith negotiations with all of its AI contractors. The Department of Defense has threatened to terminate its contract with Anthropic, label the company a “supply-chain risk,” and potentially invoke the Defense Production Act against it if, by 5:00 PM Friday, February 27, Anthropic does not drop its requests for safeguards against DOD’s potential use of Anthropic’s AI model for mass surveillance and autonomous-weapons deployment.

In the letter the senators wrote, “These DOD threats are an extraordinary and deeply alarming abuse of government power. DOD is deploying its strongest statutory tools to compel a private contractor to agree to its preferred contractual terms, using false and incoherent arguments about national security to justify its action — all because the contractor, Anthropic, has requested two reasonable safeguards in its contract with DOD. This is retaliation, and it is unacceptable. It is an attempt to bully an American company to surrender critical safety and security safeguards — the very protections the federal government should itself be mandating — and instead provide the Department unlimited power over a powerful AI model.”

The senators continued, “The Department’s resistance to restrictions on mass domestic surveillance is particularly alarming because the Trump administration is already weaponizing federal surveillance tools to chill speech and suppress dissent. … The Department’s threats against the one company willing to push back makes clear that the Trump administration has no intention of curtailing its expanding surveillance state. … The Department should end this coercive campaign and instead commit to good-faith negotiations with all its AI contractors to establish enforceable safeguards that protect the American people.”

Text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Secretary Hegseth,

The Department of Defense’s (DOD) threats to punish an American AI company for refusing to surrender basic safeguards on the use of its AI model represent a chilling abuse of government power. DOD has demanded that its AI contractors replace their standard terms of service with sweeping authorization permitting DOD to use their models for “all lawful purposes.” When one company, Anthropic, sought to retain narrow limits against mass surveillance and autonomous weapons deployment, the Department threatened to cancel the contract, designate the company a “supply chain risk,” and invoke the Defense Production Act to compel compliance. But DOD has it backwards. Our Constitution guarantees these safeguards, and the federal government must uphold them, not weaponize national security designations to evade them. Rather than participate in coercive pressure campaigns, DOD should instead engage in good-faith negotiations with all its AI contractors to establish enforceable safeguards that protect the American people from the misuse of AI.

Over the past year, the DOD awarded contracts of up to $200 million each to several major AI companies, including Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, and xAI. Thereafter, the Department entered into negotiations over AI model usage terms, ultimately asking all four companies to replace their standard corporate terms of service with sweeping authorization that the Department could use their AI models for “all lawful purposes.” Anthropic — the only AI company that had already deployed its model within classified DOD systems — requested two limitations before signing: no use of its AI model for mass domestic surveillance or for autonomous kinetic operations (that is, weapons systems capable of engaging targets without meaningful human decision-making). These were not radical demands; they are baseline guardrails that responsible AI governance requires.

The Department’s rejection of Anthropic’s two modest requests and the threats levied against it are both outrageous and illogical. DOD threatened to discontinue its contract with Anthropic and designate the company as a “supply chain risk” — a label typically reserved for entities linked to foreign adversaries. Such a designation would carry severe consequences, potentially jeopardizing the company’s ability to maintain contracts with other firms that do business with the DOD and inflicting substantial reputational and financial harm. The Department further threatened to invoke the Defense Production Act (DPA) to compel Anthropic to accept sweeping usage terms under the guise of national defense necessity. Notably, the latter two threats — to label Anthropic a supply chain risk and use the DPA against Anthropic — illustrate DOD’s incoherent and extreme position. As one commentator explained: “Either Anthropic is a risk to the DOD and should be expelled from their systems because of that danger or it is so essential to the DOD that our national security would be at risk without unrestrained access to it. It cannot be both.” That DOD continues to make both threats demonstrates that its real goal is unrelated to national security. It’s to force Anthropic to surrender.

These DOD threats are an extraordinary and deeply alarming abuse of government power. DOD is deploying its strongest statutory tools to compel a private contractor to agree to its preferred contractual terms, using false and incoherent arguments about national security to justify its action — all because the contractor, Anthropic, has requested two reasonable safeguards in its contract with DOD. This is retaliation, and it is unacceptable. It is an attempt to bully an American company to surrender critical safety and security safeguards — the very protections the federal government should itself be mandating — and instead provide the Department unlimited power over a powerful AI model.

The Department’s resistance to restrictions on mass domestic surveillance is particularly alarming because the Trump administration is already weaponizing federal surveillance tools to chill speech and suppress dissent. Since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, we have repeatedly sounded the alarm about the federal government’s expanding surveillance state. Over the past few months, we have written letters to DHS and the Department of State on their arsenal of surveillance technologies that include license plate readers, social media scanning, AI tools, facial recognition technology, and an alleged “domestic terrorist” database, yet we have received practically no answers. The pattern is unmistakable: the federal government is deploying powerful surveillance technologies with no transparency, no accountability, and no regard for civil liberties. The Department’s threats against the one company willing to push back makes clear that the Trump administration has no intention of curtailing its expanding surveillance state.

The Department’s resistance to limits on autonomous weapons is equally alarming and places human lives at risk, particularly in the hands of this administration, which has credibly been accused of war crimes and extrajudicial killings. As lawmakers grapple with requirements for meaningful human control over AI used in warfare, the Department’s hostility to those very safeguards raises serious concerns about where it intends to deploy AI without human oversight. Life-and-death decisions to use deadly force must remain in human hands, and the Department must embrace autonomous weapons safeguards rather than threatening companies that try to require them.

The federal government has an obligation to uphold the public’s safety, privacy, and civil liberties. Retaliating against companies that seek to implement reasonable protective measures to those ends is inconsistent with that obligation and undermines the very standards the government should be enforcing. The Department should end this coercive campaign and instead commit to good-faith negotiations with all its AI contractors to establish enforceable safeguards that protect the American people. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,


Van Hollen, Banking Committee Democrats Press Bondi and Bessent to Investigate Binance Following Reports of Flouting Sanctions, US Law

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a senior member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, led his Democratic colleagues on the Committee in pressing the U.S. Treasury and Justice Departments to investigate reports that Binance is facilitating illicit finance activities, including transactions linked to Iran and its proxies. Doing so would fail to comply with the settlement agreement that Binance reached in 2023 following its guilty plea of serious federal charges that included money laundering and violations of U.S. sanctions laws. In their letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Attorney General Pam Bondi, the Senators stressed that our national security is at risk if Binance is supporting the financial activities of terrorist groups or other adversaries of the United States that seek to do our nation harm. Highlighting the added concern that Binance has deepened its ties to President Donald Trump and his family in recent months, they called on Bondi and Bessent to carry out a thorough, impartial investigation for the safety and security of the American people.

Joining Senator Van Hollen on this letter are Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Committee members Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.).

“We write to express our concern with illicit finance risks presented by the digital asset firm Binance Holdings Ltd. (Binance). Recent reports raise serious concerns about the strength of illicit finance guardrails at Binance’s digital asset exchange, as well as its adherence to 2023 settlements for apparent violations of sanctions rules and breaches of anti-money laundering laws. We urge you to conduct a prompt, comprehensive review of sanctions compliance on the platform to ensure that it is not once again violating the law and threatening U.S. national security,” the Senators began.

“According to reporting, last year, Binance compliance personnel obtained evidence that $1.7 billion in digital assets had been funneled through Binance to Iranian entities tied to terrorism, including both the Iran-backed Houthis and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In one instance, evidence suggested that one of Binance’s own vendors routed $1.2 billion in funds to Iran-linked entities,” they continued. “In addition, the reports describe a broader deterioration in Binance’s compliance functions. Compliance officials at Binance have departed or been dismissed beyond those who uncovered the links to Iranian entities. According to law enforcement, Binance has grown markedly less cooperative with requests for information about customers as well.

“These allegations raise grave concerns that poor illicit finance controls at Binance remain a significant threat to national security. Our illicit finance controls are dangerously compromised if enormous sums can flow through Binance to terrorist groups or sanctions evaders,” the Senators stressed. “We accordingly urge Treasury and the Justice Department to conduct a timely, thorough inquiry into Binance’s sanctions compliance functions, including into possible retaliation against Binance compliance personnel and the company’s observance of its 2023 settlement agreements. Binance’s long-established role in illicit finance around the world means it is critical to remain vigilant about risks at the exchange. We believe that a review of the allegations above is necessary and appropriate at this time.”

Highlighting concerns with the President and his family’s business ties to Binance, the Senators wrote, “We recognize, of course, that Binance has made numerous business decisions that have helped President Trump and his family profit from their crypto ventures. The exchange has repeatedly pushed users to purchase USD1, the stablecoin issued by the Trump family’s World Liberty Financial, including through interest payments on USD1 holdings on the exchange. It also assisted with technology for USD1 and accepted a $2 billion investment made in the token. Last fall, despite claiming he had “no idea who he is,” President Trump pardoned Changpeng Zhao, Binance’s billionaire founder and former chief executive who had pleaded guilty to failing to establish an effective anti-money laundering program for the platform and was sentenced to four months in prison.

“If Binance has begun to ignore its illicit finance obligations, the risks are grave and nonpartisan, and we hope that the Trump Administration will faithfully carry out its obligations to administer our nation’s illicit finance laws. Please respond to this letter by March 13, 2026, and describe any steps you have taken to review Binance’s conduct and the allegations we have described,” the Senators concluded.

Text of the letter can be viewed here and below.

Dear Secretary Bessent and Attorney General Bondi:

We write to express our concern with illicit finance risks presented by the digital asset firm Binance Holdings Ltd. (Binance). Recent reports raise serious concerns about the strength of illicit finance guardrails at Binance’s digital asset exchange, as well as its adherence to 2023 settlements for apparent violations of sanctions rules and breaches of anti-money laundering laws. We urge you to conduct a prompt, comprehensive review of sanctions compliance on the platform to ensure that it is not once again violating the law and threatening U.S. national security.

According to reporting, last year, Binance compliance personnel obtained evidence that $1.7 billion in digital assets had been funneled through Binance to Iranian entities tied to terrorism, including both the Iran-backed Houthis and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In one instance, evidence suggested that one of Binance’s own vendors routed $1.2 billion in funds to Iran-linked entities. Investigators also learned that Iranians were able to access more than 1,500 Binance accounts, and that the platform may have been used in connection with Russian attempts to evade sanctions. Binance subsequently fired several of these staff.

In addition, the reports describe a broader deterioration in Binance’s compliance functions. Compliance officials at Binance have departed or been dismissed beyond those who uncovered the links to Iranian entities. According to law enforcement, Binance has grown markedly less cooperative with requests for information about customers as well.

These allegations raise grave concerns that poor illicit finance controls at Binance remain a significant threat to national security. Our illicit finance controls are dangerously compromised if enormous sums can flow through Binance to terrorist groups or sanctions evaders. The firm controls the world’s largest digital asset exchange; it is essential that bad actors cannot benefit from its platform. Moreover, the reports suggest the alarming possibility that Binance may be pushing out compliance staff who uncover illicit transactions on the exchange. Were it to do so, Binance would be reopening the door to widespread illicit activity on the platform.

In 2023, Binance committed to sweeping reforms to its illicit finance program under a plea agreement with the Department of Justice and related settlement agreements with the Department of the Treasury and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. But the recent reports call into question Binance’s adherence to these promises.

For example, in Binance’s agreement with the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the company committed to implementing controls that “enable [it] to clearly and effectively identify [and] interdict . . . transactions and activity that may be prohibited by OFAC.” The exchange cannot “clearly and effectively” block transactions with sanctioned persons if it permits $1.7 billion in digital assets to flow through its platform to Iranian entities.

Likewise, Binance’s plea agreement with the Justice Department requires its senior leadership to “provide strong, explicit, and visible support and commitment to its Compliance Programs” amidst a “culture of ethics and compliance with the law.” It is plainly inconsistent with such requirements to retaliate against sanctions compliance personnel or to resist law enforcement requests.

These reports arise against the backdrop of increasingly risky activities at Binance. Earlier this month, for instance, the company launched cards in parts of the former Soviet Union that permit users to pay for transactions with digital assets, functioning much like a debit card. Similar cards have become increasingly used as a tool to allow Russians to bypass U.S. sanctions on the Russian financial system. And last fall, Binance partnered with Kyrgyzstan to launch a stablecoin and digital currency, despite the country’s ties to Russian sanctions evasion.

In light of these issues, we are deeply troubled by the prospect that Binance may once again be prioritizing profits over its compliance obligations. Not long ago, Binance’s own employees joked that the company should post the “banner ‘is washing drug money too hard these days – come to [B]inance.’” We cannot permit the exchange to return to open disregard for the guardrails that protect our national security.

We accordingly urge Treasury and the Justice Department to conduct a timely, thorough inquiry into Binance’s sanctions compliance functions, including into possible retaliation against Binance compliance personnel and the company’s observance of its 2023 settlement agreements. Binance’s long-established role in illicit finance around the world means it is critical to remain vigilant about risks at the exchange. We believe that a review of the allegations above is necessary and appropriate at this time.

We recognize, of course, that Binance has made numerous business decisions that have helped President Trump and his family profit from their crypto ventures. The exchange has repeatedly pushed users to purchase USD1, the stablecoin issued by the Trump family’s World Liberty Financial, including through interest payments on USD1 holdings on the exchange. It also assisted with technology for USD1 and accepted a $2 billion investment made in the token. Last fall, despite claiming he had “no idea who he is,” President Trump pardoned Changpeng Zhao, Binance’s billionaire founder and former chief executive who had pleaded guilty to failing to establish an effective anti-money laundering program for the platform and was sentenced to four months in prison.

If Binance has begun to ignore its illicit finance obligations, the risks are grave and nonpartisan, and we hope that the Trump Administration will faithfully carry out its obligations to administer our nation’s illicit finance laws. Please respond to this letter by March 13, 2026, and describe any steps you have taken to review Binance’s conduct and the allegations we have described.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.


Van Hollen, Merkley Press Lutnick for Answers on Epstein Ties

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), a member of the Subcommittee and lead sponsor of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, are pressing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick for answers on his connections to Jeffrey Epstein, following his admission, in response to questions from Senator Van Hollen, that he had visited Jeffrey Epstein’s island after previously claiming not to have a relationship with him.

“We are writing to follow up on your exchanges regarding your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the notorious child predator, with members of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies during its February 10, 2026 hearing. Specifically, Ranking Member Van Hollen made the point that you had previously lied about the extent and nature of your relationship with Mr. Epstein. Senator Merkley also raised the issue of your relationship with him. We are writing to request additional information on that violation of public trust,” write the Senators.

“The recently released Epstein files have revealed interactions between you and Mr. Epstein that directly contradict your prior public statements—including a visit to his private island in 2012, years after you previously claimed to have severed all contact and well after his 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor. The files also show that you and Mr. Epstein were each investors in a company called Adfin in 2012. These are glaring discrepancies, and they have understandably further undermined public trust and raised serious questions that only full transparency can address,” they continue.

“In response, Ranking Member Van Hollen asked whether you would share with Congress your own records relating to your interactions with Mr. Epstein in order to ensure that the public record is complete. You responded that you would give the request some thought and stated, ‘I have nothing to hide,’” they note.

The Senators go on to request answers to a series of questions “[in] order to demonstrate to the Committee, Congress, and the American public that you do, in fact, have nothing to hide regarding your relationship with Mr. Epstein.”

The Senators requests’ for information from Lutnick include that he:

Produce all records of meetings, phone calls, and correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein or his associates, covering the full duration of your acquaintance.

Provide a complete and accurate timeline of every interaction had with Mr. Epstein, including those that took place after his 2008 conviction.

Provide any information or evidence to support the claim that Mr. Epstein is the “greatest blackmailer ever” in your October 2025 interview.

Provide answers to questions regarding his nanny.

“The American people and the survivors of Mr. Epstein’s crimes deserve a full accounting from every public official whose statements on this matter have proven incomplete. If, as you say, you have nothing to hide, then producing these records should be a straightforward matter,” they conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Lutnick:

We are writing to follow up on your exchanges regarding your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the notorious child predator, with members of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies during its February 10, 2026 hearing. Specifically, Ranking Member Van Hollen made the point that you had previously lied about the extent and nature of your relationship with Mr. Epstein. Senator Merkley also raised the issue of your relationship with him. We are writing to request additional information on that violation of public trust.

During a public interview in October 2025, you stated that after being disturbed by a tour of Mr. Epstein’s home in 2005, you “decided I will never be in the room with that disgusting person again” and that you were “never in the room with him socially, for business, or even philanthropy.”

The recently released Epstein files have revealed interactions between you and Mr. Epstein that directly contradict your prior public statements—including a visit to his private island in 2012, years after you previously claimed to have severed all contact and well after his 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor. The files also show that you and Mr. Epstein were each investors in a company called Adfin in 2012. These are glaring discrepancies, and they have understandably further undermined public trust and raised serious questions that only full transparency can address.

In response, Ranking Member Van Hollen asked whether you would share with Congress your own records relating to your interactions with Mr. Epstein in order to ensure that the public record is complete. You responded that you would give the request some thought and stated, “I have nothing to hide.”

In order to demonstrate to the Committee, Congress, and the American public that you do, in fact, have nothing to hide regarding your relationship with Mr. Epstein, we ask that you:

Produce all records of your meetings, phone calls, and correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein or his associates, covering the full duration of your acquaintance. These records should include anything of a personal, business, or other nature and those of any intermediaries, including family members, employees, or other agents of you or Mr. Epstein who facilitated any communications or interactions between you and Mr. Epstein.

Provide a complete and accurate timeline of every interaction you had with Mr. Epstein, including those that took place after his 2008 conviction.

Provide any information or evidence you have to support your claim that Mr. Epstein is the “greatest blackmailer ever” in your October 2025 interview.

Provide answers to the following questions regarding the issue of your nanny. Ranking Member Van Hollen asked you if the nanny that accompanied you in your lunch visit to Mr. Epstein’s island was the same nanny that Mr. Epstein, in his emails, expressed interest in meeting, to which you replied, “no, I have no idea about that whole thing. I mean, I don’t recall it having anything to do with me.”

Were you aware that Mr. Epstein obtained the resume of your nanny as demonstrated in the Epstein files?

Are you aware of Mr. Epstein taking interest in any of your nannies or other employees or obtaining any of their resumes or other personal information about them?

Did you, any of your family members, employees, or anyone else acting on your behalf ever provide Mr. Epstein with a resume or other personal information of this nanny or any other individual in your employ?

What is the name and contact information for your nanny who accompanied you to Epstein’s private island? What are the names and contact information of your other nannies since the time you first met Mr. Epstein to the time he was incarcerated? The answers to these two questions should be provided in a confidential manner to the Subcommittee.

No later than March 13, 2026, submit these materials to the Subcommittee to be included in the public record of the February 10, 2026 hearing for the benefit of the full Congress and the American people.

The American people and the survivors of Mr. Epstein’s crimes deserve a full accounting from every public official whose statements on this matter have proven incomplete. If, as you say, you have nothing to hide, then producing these records should be a straightforward matter.

We look forward to your response.


Van Hollen, Welch, Mullin, Levin Introduce Bicameral Bill to Improve Access to Energy Consumption Data, Lower Utility Bills

U.S. Senators Chirs Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Rural Development, Energy, and Credit and U.S. Representatives Kevin Mullin (D-CA-15) and Mike Levin (D-CA-49) introduced the E-Access Act of 2026, bicameral legislation to promote energy efficiency and help consumers save money by improving access to their energy consumption data.

“Home efficiency upgrades can help Americans save energy and lower their bills, but right now it’s hard for homeowners to calculate exactly how much they can save. This legislation makes energy data more accessible to consumers so they can get a full picture of their potential savings from making their homes more energy efficient,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Energy usage data is an important tool that families and businesses can use to improve their efficiency and lower their utility bills. But it’s too difficult for many Americans to access that data,” said Senator Welch. “We’re working to make it easier for consumers to make informed choices that will help lower their energy bills and speed our transition to an energy-efficient economy.”

“As American families face rising utility bills, it’s critical that consumers have the ability to see their own energy data and take advantage of demand-response programs that save money for households and businesses,” said Rep. Mullin. “I’m proud to co-lead the E-Access Act, which would unlock access to energy consumption data and help households across America save hundreds of millions of dollars on utility costs each year.”

“When families and small businesses can see exactly how and when they’re using energy, they’re empowered to make informed energy choices and smarter financial decisions,” said Rep. Levin. “Americans deserve transparency and real-time access to their electric and natural gas usage, billing, and pricing data to better inform their budgets. This is just one of the many steps we must take to bring down energy bills. I’m proud to partner with Rep. Mullin and Sen. Welch to lead this effort, and I look forward to working with them to move our commonsense legislation through Congress.”

Over the past two decades, taxpayers and utilities have invested billions of dollars in advanced metering infrastructure to expand access to real-time energy usage and pricing data. However, these benefits remain largely untapped due to the absence of a robust framework that would enable consumers or authorized third parties to access information in a timely and convenient manner. Unlocking this data would empower households and businesses to reduce their energy bills and strengthen grid reliability—saving consumers an estimated $250 million annually through smarter, data-driven energy usage.

At the same time, rising utility costs continue to burden families and small businesses across the United States. Lack of meaningful access to energy usage data makes it even more difficult for consumers to manage monthly bills, adjust usage when energy prices are higher, or take advantage of market-driven tools to help lower costs. New data-sharing guidelines in the E-Access Act would allow consumers to access and share their utility data with third parties, including energy efficiency contractors.

The E-Access Act is supported by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), American Economic Liberties Project, Building Performance Association, Consumer Federation of America, Efficiency Vermont, Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI), Honeywell, Institute for Market Transformation, Mission:Data Coalition, National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO), Northeast Energy Efficiency and Electrification Council (NEEEC), Rewiring America, and the U.S. Green Building Council.

“Families and businesses are facing rising energy costs, yet most still cannot access the data that would help them manage their usage and lower their bills. The E-Access Act empowers American households by giving them secure, real-time access to their own energy information,” said Alexander Ratner, Senior Federal Policy Counsel, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. “It is a simple, commonsense step that would deliver real savings and expand consumer choice in a rapidly changing energy marketplace.”

“Utilities have been hoarding their customers' own energy data for years, and they use that information as leverage to keep prices high. The E-Access Act gives power back to American consumers,” said Marissa P. Gillett, former chair of the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, and senior fellow at American Economic Liberties Project. “When customers can actually see and use their own energy data, they can start making real choices that lower their bills and put an end to monopoly utilities using data hoarding to make energy unaffordable.”

“Access to utility data is not only important for grid reliability and technology innovation, but it is also a critical tool in understanding how a particular home uses energy and its saving potential,” said Steve Skodak, President and CEO, Building Performance Association. “Energy usage information can help residential contractors and programs identify cost-effective energy-saving opportunities, measure the performance of specific energy efficiency measures, and drive both consumer behavior changes and improved program design. Empowering American households with secure access to their own digital, interval utility data and the ability to share that data, has the potential to fundamentally change how residential customers use energy.”

“Access to energy data empowers consumers and drives better outcomes for the grid,” said Peter Walke, Managing Director, Efficiency Vermont. “The E-Access Act will remove unnecessary barriers, enabling efficiency programs, demand response, and clean energy solutions to work as intended while saving people money.”

“Knowing that you don’t know something is very frustrating,” said Daniel Bresette, President, EESI. “Without access to key utility data, consumers can’t make smart decisions that will lower their energy costs. There’s no good reason to keep this data hidden away. This legislation would help remove a critical barrier, unlocking savings for consumers who want to fully invest in energy efficiency but can’t.”

“You can't manage what you don't measure. Rapidly rising energy prices are making it harder for Americans to afford to heat and cool our homes. The E-Access Act will give us the information we need to save energy and money,” said Alex Dews, CEO, Institute for Market Transformation (IMT).

“Ratepayers have spent tens of billions of dollars on smart meters, but they have yet to reap the benefits. While utility bills continue to rise, millions of ratepayers are still not able to access competitive energy services such as virtual power plants. E-ACCESS gives states essential resources and expertise to help them confront rising power bills,” said Michael Murray, President, Mission:Data Coalition.

“As a long-time administering energy efficiency services across the country, it is high up on my list of critical actions to make it more efficient and possible to access the information on energy use in homes and buildings to help provide guidance to consumers on how to lower their energy costs. This legislation will help make that possible,” said Steve Cowell, Executive Director, Northeast Energy Efficiency and Electrification Council.

“Too many households are struggling to pay utility bills, and this legislation is something Congress can pass today to provide relief. Data transparency is a critical tool for helping consumers better manage their energy use and lower their bills. Thanks to Sen. Welch and Rep. Mullin for their leadership on this issue and for introducing this legislation, which the U.S. Green Building Council fully supports,” said Ben Evans, Federal Legislative Director, U.S. Green Building Council.

Learn more about the E-Access Act of 2026.


Warner Condemns Pentagon Pressure Campaign, Raises Concerns about Politicized Directive Targeting Anthropic

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement regarding recent actions and statements by the administration targeting a leading AI company:

“As one of Congress’ most vocal proponents for the modernization of IC and DoD missions with transformative technology, I have been actively working for years to ensure that the U.S has the compute, models, and talent to seize opportunities provided by AI. At the same time, the intelligence committees have consistently sought – on a bipartisan basis, and across administrations – to ensure that AI usage in the national security context meets rigorous, consistent, and transparent standards for AI governance, particularly in contexts in which AI usage has a significant potential impact on Americans’ core rights or results in the loss of human life.

“The president’s directive to halt the use of a leading American AI company across the federal government, combined with inflammatory rhetoric attacking that company, raises serious concerns about whether national security decisions are being driven by careful analysis or political considerations. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth’s efforts to intimidate and disparage a leading American company – potentially as the pretext to steer contracts to a preferred vendor whose model a number of federal agencies have already identified as a reliability, safety, and security threat – pose an enormous risk to U.S. defense readiness and the willingness of the U.S. private sector and academia to work with the IC and DoD, consistent with their own values and legal ethics. Indeed, Secretary Hegseth’s loud insistence on the sufficiency of an ‘all lawful purposes’ standard provides cold comfort against the backdrop of Pentagon leadership that has routinely sidelined career military attorneys and challenged longstanding norms and rules regarding lethal force.”

###


Warner, Banking Committee Democrats Press Bondi and Bessent to Investigate Binance Following Reports of Flouting Sanctions, US Law

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), a member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, joined his Democratic colleagues on the Committee in pressing the U.S. Treasury and Justice Departments to investigate reports that Binance is facilitating illicit finance activities, including transactions linked to Iran and its proxies. Doing so would fail to comply with the settlement agreement that Binance reached in 2023 following its guilty plea of serious federal charges that included money laundering and violations of U.S. sanctions laws. In their letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Attorney General Pam Bondi, the senators stressed that our national security is at risk if Binance is supporting the financial activities of terrorist groups or other adversaries of the United States that seek to do our nation harm. Highlighting the added concern that Binance has deepened its ties to President Donald Trump and his family in recent months, they called on Bondi and Bessent to carry out a thorough, impartial investigation for the safety and security of the American people.

In addition to Sen. Warner, this letter was sent by Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Jack Reed (D-RI), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tina Smith (D-MN), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD).

“We write to express our concern with illicit finance risks presented by the digital asset firm Binance Holdings Ltd. (Binance). Recent reports raise serious concerns about the strength of illicit finance guardrails at Binance’s digital asset exchange, as well as its adherence to 2023 settlements for apparent violations of sanctions rules and breaches of anti-money laundering laws. We urge you to conduct a prompt, comprehensive review of sanctions compliance on the platform to ensure that it is not once again violating the law and threatening U.S. national security,” the senators began.

“According to reporting, last year, Binance compliance personnel obtained evidence that $1.7 billion in digital assets had been funneled through Binance to Iranian entities tied to terrorism, including both the Iran-backed Houthis and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In one instance, evidence suggested that one of Binance’s own vendors routed $1.2 billion in funds to Iran-linked entities,” they continued. “In addition, the reports describe a broader deterioration in Binance’s compliance functions. Compliance officials at Binance have departed or been dismissed beyond those who uncovered the links to Iranian entities. According to law enforcement, Binance has grown markedly less cooperative with requests for information about customers as well.

“These allegations raise grave concerns that poor illicit finance controls at Binance remain a significant threat to national security. Our illicit finance controls are dangerously compromised if enormous sums can flow through Binance to terrorist groups or sanctions evaders,” the senators stressed. “We accordingly urge Treasury and the Justice Department to conduct a timely, thorough inquiry into Binance’s sanctions compliance functions, including into possible retaliation against Binance compliance personnel and the company’s observance of its 2023 settlement agreements. Binance’s long-established role in illicit finance around the world means it is critical to remain vigilant about risks at the exchange. We believe that a review of the allegations above is necessary and appropriate at this time.”

Highlighting concerns with the President and his family’s business ties to Binance, the senators wrote, “We recognize, of course, that Binance has made numerous business decisions that have helped President Trump and his family profit from their crypto ventures. The exchange has repeatedly pushed users to purchase USD1, the stablecoin issued by the Trump family’s World Liberty Financial, including through interest payments on USD1 holdings on the exchange. It also assisted with technology for USD1 and accepted a $2 billion investment made in the token. Last fall, despite claiming he had “no idea who he is,” President Trump pardoned Changpeng Zhao, Binance’s billionaire founder and former chief executive who had pleaded guilty to failing to establish an effective anti-money laundering program for the platform and was sentenced to four months in prison.

“If Binance has begun to ignore its illicit finance obligations, the risks are grave and nonpartisan, and we hope that the Trump Administration will faithfully carry out its obligations to administer our nation’s illicit finance laws. Please respond to this letter by March 13, 2026, and describe any steps you have taken to review Binance’s conduct and the allegations we have described,” the senators concluded.

Text of the letter can be viewed here and below.

Dear Secretary Bessent and Attorney General Bondi:

We write to express our concern with illicit finance risks presented by the digital asset firm Binance Holdings Ltd. (Binance). Recent reports raise serious concerns about the strength of illicit finance guardrails at Binance’s digital asset exchange, as well as its adherence to 2023 settlements for apparent violations of sanctions rules and breaches of anti-money laundering laws. We urge you to conduct a prompt, comprehensive review of sanctions compliance on the platform to ensure that it is not once again violating the law and threatening U.S. national security.

According to reporting, last year, Binance compliance personnel obtained evidence that $1.7 billion in digital assets had been funneled through Binance to Iranian entities tied to terrorism, including both the Iran-backed Houthis and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In one instance, evidence suggested that one of Binance’s own vendors routed $1.2 billion in funds to Iran-linked entities. Investigators also learned that Iranians were able to access more than 1,500 Binance accounts, and that the platform may have been used in connection with Russian attempts to evade sanctions. Binance subsequently fired several of these staff.

In addition, the reports describe a broader deterioration in Binance’s compliance functions. Compliance officials at Binance have departed or been dismissed beyond those who uncovered the links to Iranian entities. According to law enforcement, Binance has grown markedly less cooperative with requests for information about customers as well.

These allegations raise grave concerns that poor illicit finance controls at Binance remain a significant threat to national security. Our illicit finance controls are dangerously compromised if enormous sums can flow through Binance to terrorist groups or sanctions evaders. The firm controls the world’s largest digital asset exchange; it is essential that bad actors cannot benefit from its platform. Moreover, the reports suggest the alarming possibility that Binance may be pushing out compliance staff who uncover illicit transactions on the exchange. Were it to do so, Binance would be reopening the door to widespread illicit activity on the platform.

In 2023, Binance committed to sweeping reforms to its illicit finance program under a plea agreement with the Department of Justice and related settlement agreements with the Department of the Treasury and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. But the recent reports call into question Binance’s adherence to these promises.

For example, in Binance’s agreement with the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the company committed to implementing controls that “enable [it] to clearly and effectively identify [and] interdict . . . transactions and activity that may be prohibited by OFAC.” The exchange cannot “clearly and effectively” block transactions with sanctioned persons if it permits $1.7 billion in digital assets to flow through its platform to Iranian entities.

Likewise, Binance’s plea agreement with the Justice Department requires its senior leadership to “provide strong, explicit, and visible support and commitment to its Compliance Programs” amidst a “culture of ethics and compliance with the law.” It is plainly inconsistent with such requirements to retaliate against sanctions compliance personnel or to resist law enforcement requests.

These reports arise against the backdrop of increasingly risky activities at Binance. Earlier this month, for instance, the company launched cards in parts of the former Soviet Union that permit users to pay for transactions with digital assets, functioning much like a debit card. Similar cards have become increasingly used as a tool to allow Russians to bypass U.S. sanctions on the Russian financial system. And last fall, Binance partnered with Kyrgyzstan to launch a stablecoin and digital currency, despite the country’s ties to Russian sanctions evasion.

In light of these issues, we are deeply troubled by the prospect that Binance may once again be prioritizing profits over its compliance obligations. Not long ago, Binance’s own employees joked that the company should post the “banner ‘is washing drug money too hard these days – come to [B]inance.’” We cannot permit the exchange to return to open disregard for the guardrails that protect our national security.

We accordingly urge Treasury and the Justice Department to conduct a timely, thorough inquiry into Binance’s sanctions compliance functions, including into possible retaliation against Binance compliance personnel and the company’s observance of its 2023 settlement agreements. Binance’s long-established role in illicit finance around the world means it is critical to remain vigilant about risks at the exchange. We believe that a review of the allegations above is necessary and appropriate at this time.

We recognize, of course, that Binance has made numerous business decisions that have helped President Trump and his family profit from their crypto ventures. The exchange has repeatedly pushed users to purchase USD1, the stablecoin issued by the Trump family’s World Liberty Financial, including through interest payments on USD1 holdings on the exchange. It also assisted with technology for USD1 and accepted a $2 billion investment made in the token. Last fall, despite claiming he had “no idea who he is,” President Trump pardoned Changpeng Zhao, Binance’s billionaire founder and former chief executive who had pleaded guilty to failing to establish an effective anti-money laundering program for the platform and was sentenced to four months in prison.

If Binance has begun to ignore its illicit finance obligations, the risks are grave and nonpartisan, and we hope that the Trump Administration will faithfully carry out its obligations to administer our nation’s illicit finance laws. Please respond to this letter by March 13, 2026, and describe any steps you have taken to review Binance’s conduct and the allegations we have described.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

###


Warner, Kaine Introduce Direct File Act to Guarantee Free, Easy Tax Filing for Americans

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) joined over 150 lawmakers in introducing the Direct File Act, new legislation that would reverse the Trump administration’s decision to end the highly successful Direct File program — which allowed taxpayers to file their taxes online, for free, and directly with the government — and make the program permanent.

“Virginians should be able to file their taxes, quickly, easily, and for free,” said the senators. “The Trump administration’s senseless decision to end the Direct File program cost taxpayers billions of dollars. This bill would fully restore the program and make it permanent so that every year Americans have a reliable, hassle-free way to file their taxes.”

The average American taxpayer spends eight hours and $160 each year filing their taxes with tax prep companies. In 2024, the IRS launched Direct File to save families time and money. 94% of users described their experience as “excellent” or “above average,” and more than 70% of taxpayers said they would use Direct File if they were eligible. If fully implemented, Direct File was projected to save families up to $23 billion annually in fees, time, and tax credits.

Despite Direct File’s success, the Trump Administration ended the program after extensive lobbying efforts by tax prep companies. This decision contradicts recommendations from the independent Government Accountability Office and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, ultimately raising costs for Americans and making the tax filing experience even more burdensome.

In addition to directing the IRS to establish and operate a free online tax preparation and filing program, the Direct File Act would:

Prohibit the IRS from entering into agreements that restrict its ability to provide free online tax preparation or filing services.

Direct the IRS to publish an annual report on use levels, patterns of usage, and ways to improve access to Direct File.

Direct the IRS to enable seamless integration between state tax filing systems and Direct File, including through information sharing and a new grant program for states.

Reduce tax fraud by getting third-party income information to the IRS earlier in the tax season, allowing the agency to verify this information before issuing refunds.

In addition to Warner and Kaine, 38 other senators sponsored this legislation, including U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Chris Coons (D-DE), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), John Fetterman (D-PA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

120 Members of the House of Representatives sponsored the bill as well.

The bill is endorsed by 115 unions, advocacy groups, and national organizations, including Public Citizen, Americans for Tax Fairness, Economic Security Project Action, Groundwork Collaborative, AFL-CIO, American Federation of Teachers (AFT), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Communications Workers of America, Americans for Financial Reform, National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients), Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), Main Street Alliance, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, P Street, Patriotic Millionaires, Institute for Policy Studies - Program on Inequality, MoveOn, UnidosUS, 20/20 Vision, Advancing CT Together, Alliance for Retired Americans, Allons Babies, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), Arkansas Asset Builders, Brazilian Worker Center Inc, California Alliance of Caregivers, CASH Campaign of Maryland, Catalyst Miami, Center for New Revenue, Center for the Study of Social Policy, Children's HealthWatch, Church Women United in New York State, Coalition on Human Needs, Color Of Change, Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, Colorado Fiscal Institute, Community Change Action, Connecticut Voices for Children, Consumer Action, Courage California, Demand Progress, Elevate Idaho Families, End Child Poverty CA powered by GRACE, Fair Share America, Faith in Minnesota, Financial Empowerment Network, Futures Without Violence, Garrett County Community Action Committee, Inc., Golden State Opportunity, Grow Brooklyn, Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks!, Housing Action Illinois, Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy, In the Public Interest, Income Movement, Indivisible Georgia Coalition, ISAIAH (MN), Jobs with Justice, LIFT Inc, LIFT-DC, Maine Center for Economic Policy, Maine Equal Justice, MakingChange, Inc, Marion County Commission on Youth (MCCOY), Maryland Center on Economic Policy, Maryland Volunteer Lawyers Service, Meals4Families, Minnesota Budget Project, Mothers Outreach Network, My Money Story, National Association of Social Workers, National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, National Council of Jewish Women Los Angeles, National Organization for Women, National Rural Social Work Caucus, NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, New Jersey Policy Perspective, New Mexico Voices for Children, Northern Santa Barbara County United Way, Northwest Progressive Institute, Oregon Center for Public Policy, Oxfam America, Prepare + Prosper, Prosperity Indiana, Public Good Law Center, RAISE Texas, Responsible Wealth, RESULTS, RESULTS DC/MD, RESULTS.org-Massachusetts, Rise Up WV, RootsAction, San Diego for Every Child, SiX Action, Social Work Grand Challenge to Reduce Extreme Economic Inequality, State Innovation Exchange, Strong Economy For All Coalition, The Arc of the United States, Touch Stones Financial Wellness Services, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Hidalgo County Texas, Unitarian Universalists for Social Justice, United for a Fair Economy, United for Respect, United Way of Frederick County, United Ways of the Pacific Northwest, Upper West Side Action Group, Vesta Prosperity, Voices for Progress, Washington Anti-Hunger & Nutrition Coalition, Washington State Budget and Policy Center, Women Employed, and Young Invincibles.

“A free, direct e-filing tax return system is a fundamental taxpayer right,” said Nina Olson, Executive Director of the Center for Taxpayer Rights and former National Taxpayer Advocate. “Just as the government designs and printed paper tax forms for years, so should it design and maintain a user-friendly electronic filing option for individual taxpayers.”

The full bill can be found here and a summary of the bill can be found here.

###


ICYMI: Trump Nominee Dodges Warren’s Questions About Diverting Military Funds, Troops to Immigration Enforcement

Warren: “DoD and DHS have no reimbursement agreement in place for FY2025. So it appears that DoD won’t get back the billions of dollars it handed over to ICE that year. Money meant to fix barracks with sewage overflows is just gone.”

Nominee also refused to say if it would be inappropriate to deploy the military to intimidate voters during the midterm elections and denied deploying troops to American cities hurts morale

Video of Exchange (YouTube)

Washington, D.C. — At a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Personnel, pressed Mr. Mark Ditlevson, nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas Security Affairs, about the Homeland Security Department’s failure to reimburse the military for supporting immigration enforcement reimbursements and the morale impact of deploying troops to American cities.

A December 2025 investigation led by Senator Warren and Representative Garamendi’s offices found the Defense Department diverted over $2 billion in taxpayer funds to support immigration enforcement in 2025. The funds were diverted from projects like repairing military barracks, training service members, and repairing schools for service members’ children.

Mr. Ditlevson could not answer how much the Pentagon would be reimbursed for these funding diversions, only saying they “expect to chase () down” FY 2026 funds, which he claims are reimbursable. Senator Warren pointed out the Defense and Homeland Security Departments have no reimbursement agreement in place for FY2025, meaning the military will not get that money back.

In December 2025, Mr. Ditlevson testified before the Armed Services Committee that domestic deployments “without a shadow of a doubt (are) not having a negative effect on the military’s readiness or budget.”

Senator Warren noted that public reporting indicated National Guard members feel “fatigue, confusion, and demoralization,” along with shame and plans to quit. Mr. Ditlevson denied any knowledge, even though his current office regularly communicates with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau on domestic deployments.

Senator Warren also raised concerns that these deployments serve as a precursor for President Trump to deploy troops to intimidate voters at polling locations for the 2026 midterm elections. Asked if this would be an appropriate use of the military, Mr. Ditlevson refused to answer.

“(I)f you are not willing to just say ‘no, it is not appropriate,’ then I have real concerns about you in this job,” Senator Warren responded.

Transcript: Hearing to Consider the Nomination Mr. Mark R. Ditlevson to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas Security Affairs

Senate Armed Services Committee

February 26, 2026

Senator Elizabeth Warren: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Service members enlist to protect our country from foreign adversaries. But President Trump seems hellbent on deploying our troops to American streets and against our own neighbors.

This is extremely dangerous for our communities and our democracy — and it is costly for DOD and our service members too. According to the Congressional Budget Office, Trump has already spent half a billion dollars on domestic deployments. And my investigation found that DOD spent over $2 billion in taxpayer money on immigration enforcement in 2025. Now, that is money that is coming straight from the military’s budget for things like repairing military barracks, training our soldiers, repairing schools for service members’ children.

DOD took this money from our service members even though the agency that is responsible for immigration enforcement, ICE, is swimming in a budget that’s bigger than most other countries’ entire militaries’ budget.

Mr. Ditlevson, you’re nominated to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas Security Affairs, and you’re serving as a deputy in that office right now. How much of the $2 billion do you expect to get back from DHS?

Mr. Mark Ditlevson, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas Security Affairs: I appreciate your concern on this issue and it’s something that we’re working toward on a daily basis—

Senator Warren: How much do you expect to get back?

Mr. Ditlevson: At the beginning of this fiscal year, FY26, the Secretary worked out a policy issue—issued a policy—saying that all support was on a reimbursable basis and on a day-to-day basis, Senator, that’s what we prepare up to the Secretary for decision—

Senator Warren: Do you expect to get it all back?

Mr. Ditlevson: Senator, everything is on a reimbursable basis, so we expect to chase that down—

Senator Warren: I have to question your “everything.” DoD and DHS have no reimbursement agreement in place for FY2025. So it appears that DoD won’t get back the billions of dollars it handed over to ICE that year. Money meant to fix barracks with sewage overflows is just gone.

Now, in December, when asked about domestic deployments, you told this committee, “I can say without a shadow of a doubt this is not having a negative effect on the military’s readiness or budget,” but an internal study of the National Guard of the deployment in D.C. noted, “fatigue, confusion, and demoralization,” a “wedge between citizens and the military.” National Guard members have told reporters that this is “Not what I signed up to do,” and that they feel ashamed to wear the uniform and that they plan to quit.

So Mr. Ditlevson, do you think “without a shadow of a doubt” that deploying the military in American cities has no negative effect on readiness?

Mr. Ditlevson: Senator, I'm unfamiliar with the report but I’m going to take that back with me and dig into it and if confirmed, I absolutely will be looking at this seriously because we want to make sure our support is appropriate for the mission.

Senator Warren: You haven’t heard any of this—none of this— in your role? You have been sitting there in the office every day since the deployment. You haven’t heard any of this?

Mr. Ditlevson: Senator, I haven’t heard any feedback like that from the National Guard Bureau. I work closely with General Nordhaus, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, and he has not expressed concern over the deployments to Washington, D.C.

Senator Warren: And that’s your only source of information right now?

Mr. Ditlevson: Senator, he's the person I engage with most on this particular issue. Brigadier General Blanchard—

Senator Warren: You may want to widen your aperture for getting information here. Look, the stakes are high, and I fear they’re only going to get higher. President Trump recently said he should have used troops to seize ballot boxes in 2020. And many Americans worry he will deploy the military to intimidate voters this fall.

Mr. Ditlevson, do you think it would be appropriate to station troops next to polling stations?

Mr. Ditlevson: Senator, I'm aware of the statute that governs the deployment of troops next to polling stations. And I want to emphasize that our focus is always to protect American citizens. And so, for any deployment of the National Guard, no matter what that may be, that is always going to be our number one objective, is to make sure that people are safe and secure.

Senator Warren: So, you are nominated for this position and I’m just asking if you think it’s appropriate to station troops next to polling stations. A simple yes or no?

Mr. Ditlevson: Senator, it’s speculative, the question and I don’t want to speak about what threat levels may exist during an election cycle.

Senator Warren: I have to say, if you are not willing to just say “no, it is not appropriate,” then I have real concerns about you in this job.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

###


Welch Urges Action Against Trump’s Threats to Undermine 2026 Elections

Welch joins Senate Rules Committee Democrats for a forum exposing President Trump’s attempts to “take over” federal elections

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), a member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, joined Senate Rules Committee Ranking Member Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Senate Rules Committee Democrats for a public forum highlighting how President Trump’s threats to “take over the voting” in several states endanger the voting rights of millions of Americans and jeopardize the integrity of U.S. elections. The forum also highlighted how states, localities, and civil society are pushing back against the administration’s continued attacks on states’ election administration authority and offered a blueprint for states as they prepare for the 2026 midterm elections.

“There are two lies at the heart of this effort—it’s not about voter ID. Lie one is that the 2020 election is stolen and lie two is that there’s massive voter fraud. And what I understand…is there is no documentation whatsoever to the assertion about voter fraud. But the lie of the election fraud continues,” said Senator Welch. “So, this is going to be a full-on assault that is not going to relent.”

Watch Senator Welch’s full remarks below:

When asked about the dangers of Republicans’ SAVE Act by Senator Welch, witness Norm Eisen responded:

Norm Eisen: The entire SAVE Act is mischaracterized—intentionally mischaracterized—as a voter ID act. It’s really a voter suppression act or a voter burdening act, Senator. Because every aspect of the SAVE Act—if you read through the bill—every aspect is intended to solve a nonexistent problem. Demanding proof of citizenship at the polls; photo ID requirements—what counts as documentary proof? Burdening online registration system[s]; the preemption effects on our hardworking state and local elections officials—who are doing such a good job—exposing them to enhance legal liability…I could go on and on.

…

Senators Welch and Padilla were joined at the forum by Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

Senators heard from panelists including Fulton County, Georgia Commissioner Mo Ivory; California Attorney General Rob Bonta; Founder of Democracy Defenders and Former U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic Norm Eisen; and Former Maricopa County, Arizona Recorder, Fellow at the CATO Institute, and CEO of Republic Affairs Stephen Richer. Watch a livestream of the forum here.

Senator Welch is a long-time supporter of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation that would update and restore critical safeguards of the original Voting Rights Act of 1965 that have been eroded in recent years by federal court rulings.

###