Peterson Confirmed as New Alaska Federal Judge

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) today thanked his Senate colleagues for voting to confirm Aaron Christian Peterson, of Eagle River, Alaska, as a judge on the United States District Court for the District of Alaska. On November 19, 2025, Sen. Sullivan introduced Peterson at his nomination hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Today, in a strong bipartisan vote, the Senate confirmed Alaska’s new federal judge, Aaron Peterson,” said Sen. Sullivan. “Aaron has extensive legal experience in our state spanning criminal prosecution, natural resources law, and national security. Throughout his career, which includes military service, Aaron has demonstrated a commitment to the rule of law and federalism. Aaron is a lifelong Alaskan and knows and understands our great state and the unique federal laws that impact us. I’m confident that he will be a great federal judge for our state. I’d like to thank each of the members of the Alaska Federal Judiciary Council, who worked with me to vet a number of well-qualified Alaska nominees, including Aaron. The council’s diligent work and input were invaluable in ensuring Alaskans are represented by jurists and citizens of the highest caliber. Congratulations to Aaron and to his family!”

Aaron Christian Peterson is a born-and-raised Alaskan and U.S. Air Force veteran who served as senior assistant attorney general in the Alaska Department of Law’s (DOL) Natural Resources Section, where he served as primary litigation counsel on fisheries matters in which the State of Alaska has an interest. Peterson also previously served as assistant attorney general in the DOL’s Office of Special Prosecutions from 2015 to 2019, prosecuting statewide fish and wildlife crimes. He also served as assistant district attorney in Anchorage from 2012 to 2015, where he handled a wide range of criminal cases. Peterson began his legal career clerking for Alaska Superior Court Judge Michael Spaan from 2010 to 2011. Peterson earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Alaska Anchorage, and his Juris Doctor from the Gonzaga University School of Law.

Sen. Sullivan solicited potential applications to fill vacancies on the court through the Alaska Federal Judiciary Council (AFJC), originally convened by Sullivan in 2023 to recommend candidates for federal judgeship vacancies. The council conducted thorough reviews and recommended applicants, including Peterson, to Sen. Sullivan, who then submitted his name, among others, to the President, who made the final decision.

# # #


Thune: Female Athletes Deserve a Level Playing Field

Clickhereto watch the video.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor:

Thune’s remarks below (as delivered):

“Mr. President, it’s one year this week since President Trump signed an executive order to protect women’s and girls’ opportunities in sports.

“The order denied federal funding to institutions that allow women’s sports to be hijacked by biological males.

“Mr. President, this is an issue that means a lot to me.

“Sports are – always have been – a big deal in my family.

“And I’m the proud father of two daughters, both of whom excelled as student athletes, one of whom is in both a high school and college hall of fame.

“One of my granddaughters has started playing soccer and basketball.

“And I want all of my granddaughters to be able to enjoy the opportunities and benefits that sports offer.

“Women’s sports have made tremendous strides in the past decades.

“Once a low – or nonexistent – priority for schools and universities, women’s sports programs today are thriving, thanks in large part to Title IX: the landmark 1972 legislation that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sex in education, opening up equal spaces and opportunities for women.

“But now women’s sports are facing a new challenge: the push to allow biological males to compete in women’s sports.

“Mr. President, let me start by saying that this is a problem my Democrat colleagues and others on the left would like to minimize.

“‘It’s not a big deal’ is the clear message we get from them.

“Well, Mr. President, it is a big deal.

“Biological males are taking up places meant for women across a wide variety of sports.

“Basketball. Swimming. Track. Softball. Volleyball. Soccer. Wrestling.

“And women are losing out as a result.

“At the most basic level … they’re losing out on a slot on the team.

“Every roster place that goes to a male is a roster place that does not – does not – go to a female.

“And for women who are on the roster – well, the presence of a biological male can (and frequently does) rob them of opportunities to excel.

“Biologically, men possess physical advantages when it comes to sports – things like greater muscle mass and greater aerobic power – which means that, by and large, men are likely to dominate in women’s sports, taking wins and medal opportunities away from women.

“And those wins and medal opportunities aren’t just chances to excel – for high school students … they can also be the key to things like college scholarships.

“As one female runner who was robbed of multiple wins by a biological male described the situation, and I quote, ‘It robs girls of the chance to race in front of college scouts who show up for elite meets, and to compete for the scholarships and opportunities that come with college recruitment. I’ll never know how my own college recruitment was impacted by losing those four state championship titles to a male. When colleges looked at my record, they didn’t see the fastest girl in Connecticut. They saw a second- or third-place runner.’

“Mr. President, a 2024 United Nations report on violence against women and girls – this one focused on sports – had this to say, and I quote:

“‘Policies implemented by international federations and national governing bodies, along with national legislation in some countries, allow males who identify as women to compete in female sports categories. … The replacement of the female sports category with a mixed-sex category has resulted in an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities, including medals, when competing against males. According to information received, by 30 March 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports.’

“Let me just repeat that, Mr. President.

“‘… over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports.’

“Mr. President, you cannot allow biological men to compete in women’s sports without disadvantaging women.

“That is just simply a fact.

“It’s also common sense.

“I’ve given examples and cited a UN report, but most people don’t need [either] to know that the idea of biological males taking up spaces in women’s sports is wrong.

“Polling shows that a huge majority of the American people oppose biological males playing women’s sports.

“And last year I gave members of both parties the chance to take action – to uphold the intentions of Title IX and ensure that there are genuine spaces and opportunities for women.

“The Senate voted on the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act – legislation from my colleague Senator Tuberville (a former high school girls’ basketball coach) to ensure that women, and women only, participate in women’s sports at federally funded educational institutions.

“And every single Democrat opposed the bill.

“Every Democrat voted against protecting spaces for women and girls in sports.

“Not one member – not one member – of the party that likes to style itself as the champion of women’s rights could bring himself or herself to support women.

“Transgender ideology won the day.

“And women took second place.

“And so, Mr. President, the challenges for women and girls in sports continue.

“Thanks to this administration’s actions, Title IX is being enforced and upheld, and women and girls playing sports at federally funded educational institutions are protected.

“But thanks to my Democrat colleagues, those protections can be removed or reversed by the next administration.

“Generations of women have benefited from fair competition and equal opportunity thanks to Title IX.

“Will Democrats spell the end of Title IX’s achievements?

“Mr. President, I hope not.”


Thune Joins America Reports on Fox News, The Hugh Hewitt Show

Clickhere to watch America Reports andhere to listen to The Hugh Hewitt Show.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today joined America Reports on Fox News and The Hugh Hewitt Show.

On the importance of funding the Department of Homeland Security:

“[Democrats] … negotiated a deal to fund the Department of Homeland Security, and then subsequently walked away from it and blew up the package of appropriation bills that [Republicans and Democrats] had carefully put together … Then they wanted a separate funding bill for DHS that was a continuing resolution that would allow for some time to negotiate pieces of a bill that might ultimately pass, and then they walked away from that.”

[…]

“But at the end of the day, [Republicans] are not going to do things that are going to undermine law enforcement officials’ ability to do their jobs.”

[…]

“[Democrats] are so scared of their … base right now that they can’t do anything around here. And the Trump Derangement Syndrome is what’s driving, ultimately animating, most of their behavior. But if they actually do want to fund … the Department of Homeland Security … that bill includes TSA, it includes FEMA, it includes the Coast Guard, a number of agencies that are really important to our government – then they need to sit down with the White House and figure out what it is they actually want. We haven’t seen what that is yet.”

On the consequences of a government shutdown:

“If the Senate Democrats … want to make a deal here, they’re going to have to sit down with the White House and figure out a path forward. But I don’t think the Democrats know what they want … they haven’t given us the list of their demands yet, other than these vague categories … But TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, … CISA, the cyber operations for the country, are all in that bill, and if they decide to shut the government down, I think it’s going to be a very hard position to defend.”

On the SAVE America Act:

“The issue there really is a very simple one, and that is, should noncitizens be voting in American elections? The answer is no. And the Democrats have taken a hard position that it’s okay!

“Now, the law already prevents that, but if that’s true, then why wouldn’t we want to put into law something that would require, when you go to vote, that you prove you are a United States citizen? And that’s all the SAVE [America] Act does … [Democrats] can cry and lament this actually being voted on but I’d be hard-pressed to have to defend a position that doesn’t believe that you have to be an American citizen to vote in an American election.”

[…]

“[Democrats’] political base is demanding they fight with anything that President Trump wants. It is Trump Derangement Syndrome, it is on steroids around here these days, and even logical, commonsensical things like ensuring that if you’re going to vote in an American election, you ought to be an American citizen, they’re going to just instinctively oppose.”


Tuberville Honors Antonio Parker of Montgomery as February “Veteran of the Month”

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) released a video honoring U.S. Marine Corps Master Gunnery Sergeant Antonio Parker as the February “Veteran of the Month.”

Excerpts of Sen. Tuberville’s remarks can be found below, and complete remarks can be found here.

“I often say, ‘This country owes you one thing — and that’s an opportunity.’ But it’s up to you what you do with that opportunity. No one demonstrates making the most of this opportunity better than Master Gunnery Sergeant Antonio Parker of Montgomery.

Antonio grew up in a small town with humble beginnings in Southern Virginia. But his mother instilled in him the values of service and a good education. She practiced what she preached by tutoring those who couldn’t read and serving at the local church. Anthonio promised her that he would get his own education. And in 1981— one week after graduating high school — Antonio enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps. What began as a way to pay for a college education and keep his promise to his mother, led Antonio to 28 years of military service, including more than ten deployments. During this time, he earned five degrees focusing on business and leadership.

[…]

After retiring from the military in 2009, Antonio’s focus shifted to empowering those around him in the Montgomery area. He’s completed 59 marathons and loves to help others lead healthier lives. Throughout the years, he has planned multiple community health events, including his ‘Fit-4-Life’ 5k, where all proceeds go toward education for those in need.

[…]

It’s no wonder that such an extraordinary person is nicknamed ‘Superman’ by his colleague, Officer Benjamin Duffy, who says that Antonio is, ‘truly an exceptional man, great patriot, and an even better Alabamian!’ It’s my honor to recognize Antonio Parker as the ‘February Veteran of the Month.’”

Constituents can nominate an Alabama veteran and submit their information to Sen. Tuberville’s office for consideration in the 2026 “Veteran of the Month” series by emailing press_office@tuberville.senate.gov.

Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP and Aging Committees.

###


Van Hollen Joins Casten, Smith on Legislation to Mitigate Climate Risk in US Financial System

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Tina Smith (D-Minn.) and Representative Sean Casten (D-Ill.-06) in introducing the Addressing Climate Financial Risk Act, legislation to improve the ability of federal regulators to understand and mitigate risks from climate change within our financial system.

Climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of wildfires, flooding, droughts, and other natural disasters and extreme weather events. The damage and risks generated by these events – in addition to changes needed to transition to a cleaner economy – threaten to severely disrupt real estate values across the country, reshape entire sectors of the economy, and make homeowners’ insurance increasingly unaffordable. At the same time, the Trump Administration is dismantling the progress made under the Biden Administration, which means our regulators are less informed, equipped, and prepared to deal with current and future climate-driven financial crises. Climate change threatens the stability of the U.S. financial system, which is why it is so important to ensure financial regulators approach it in a comprehensive way.

In addition to Senator Van Hollen, the bill is cosponsored by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), and Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).

In the House, the bill is cosponsored by Representatives Kathy Castor (D-Fla.-14), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.-36), Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.-15), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.-01), Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.-03), Jared Huffman (I-Calif.-02), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.-01), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.-07), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.-26), Dwight Evans (D-Pa.-03), Dave Min (D-Calif.-47), and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.-10).

Specifically, the Addressing Climate Financial Risk Act would:

Re-establish two climate-focused committees within the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which will advise and inform the Council on best practices in identifying and mitigating climate financial risk. FSOC is composed of the heads of our banking, housing, securities, and insurance regulators and has the authority to address risks that threaten the stability of the U.S. financial system.

Require FSOC to publish an updated report on climate financial risk, following the Biden Administration’s important 2021 report.

Direct banking regulators to update non-binding supervisory guidance to include climate financial risk, which will help banks with more than $50 billion in assets better manage the short and long-term risks associated with climate change.

Codify FSOC’s 2023 proposal to include climate financial risk in its analysis under FSOC’s process for designating firms as “systemically important”, allowing FSOC to use this underutilized tool to address threats posed by climate change.

Direct the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) to publish an updated report on climate financial risk and continue its climate-related data call for 2023, 2024, and onward. For calendar years 2018-2022, FIO conducted a first-of-its-kind data collection to better understand how climate change was affecting homeowners’ insurance affordability and availability.

Express the sense of Congress that our financial regulators should rejoin international climate organizations, including the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS).


Van Hollen Joins Warnock, Warren in Blasting OMB Director Vought Over Proposed Rule to End Discrimination Protections

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, alongside seven of their Senate Democratic colleagues, to urge Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Acting Director Russell Vought to rescind a proposed rule that would end discrimination protections at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA)’s disparate impact test has been used for over 50 years to combat some of the most nefarious forms of discrimination and ensures every American has fair and nondiscriminatory access to consumer and business credit.

“The Trump Administration’s wrongheaded attempts to destroy this longstanding tenet of our civil rights protections — and your defense of those actions — is callous, unjust, and yet another handout to industry on the backs of American consumers. ECOA prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, marital status, race, color, religion, national origin, age, and source of income in credit transactions. In some cases, lending discrimination is explicit: a lender makes clear to an individual that they are being denied credit, or offered worse terms, as a direct result of a protected characteristic. In many cases, however, discrimination is less explicit: a policy or pattern of behavior by a lender can produce discriminatory outcomes, whether or not the lenders intention is to discriminate,” the lawmakers wrote.

The ECOA is a federal civil rights law that protects individuals from discrimination by lenders based on defining characteristics. The Trump Administration’s proposed rule would eliminate longstanding fair lending protections and make it easier for creditors to deny Americans without providing a clear explanation as to why they are being denied.

“The CFPB’s proposed rule would eliminate longstanding fair lending protections, increase housing and lending costs, and undermine ECOA’s original purpose and decades of progress toward closing the wealth gap. Given our concerns, we urge you to rescind the CFPB’s proposed rule and provide a briefing on your efforts to do so,” the lawmakers concluded.

In addition to Senators Van Hollen, Warnock, and Warren, the letter was signed by Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

The full text of the letter can be found here and below:

Dear Acting Director Vought:

We write today to urge you to rescind the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)’s proposed rule to end the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA)’s disparate impact test, which would prohibit the agency from blocking lending policies that have an unfair impact on historically discriminated-against groups. Despite what you claimed in an op-ed last week, this would open the floodgates for discrimination in all consumer lending, including mortgages, credit cards, and car loans. It would also stop lenders from establishing Special Purpose Credit Programs (SPCP), which are designed to expand homeownership access those same marginalized communities. This proposal would gut longstanding civil rights protections, widen the wealth gap, and increase housing, credit card, car loan, and other borrowing costs by undermining ECOA’s core purpose of ensuring everyone has fair and nondiscriminatory access to credit.

The disparate impact test has been used for over 50 years to combat some of the most nefarious forms of discrimination and has been upheld by the Supreme Court repeatedly. The Trump Administration’s wrongheaded attempts to destroy this longstanding tenet of our civil rights protections and your defense of those actions—is callous, unjust, and yet another handout to industry on the backs of American consumers.

ECOA prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, marital status, race, color, religion, national origin, age, and source of income in credit transactions. In some cases, lending discrimination is explicit: a lender makes clear to an individual that they are being denied credit, or offered worse terms, as a direct result of a protected characteristic. In many cases, however, discrimination is less explicit: a policy or pattern of behavior by a lender can produce discriminatory outcomes, whether or not the lender’s intention is to discriminate. These cases are examples of disparate impact: practices that adversely affect one group of people of a protected characteristic more than another, even if the policy or practice may seem neutral on its face. By focusing on the consequences of seemingly neutral policies and practices, disparate impact analyses help uncover discrimination that is prohibited under the law, regardless of intent.

Disparate impact analysis is a critical piece of civil rights enforcement, including under ECOA. In passing and amending ECOA, Congress made clear that focusing only on intentional, explicit discrimination was not sufficient to address inequity in the credit market. Congressional Committee reports explicitly stated that agencies should not only look at the creditor's intentions, but also at the effects of policies and practices. For the last 45 years, federal courts have consistently upheld disparate impact claims under ECOA. Indeed, as our economy, housing, and lending markets have evolved over time, including through the introduction of new technologies that give borrowers less face-time with lenders and less insight into decision-making practices, the vast majority of ECOA cases rely on disparate impact analysis. ECOA and the CFPB’s implementing regulations explicitly require lenders to thoroughly review policies, procedures, and outcomes for disparate outcomes. Yet, the CFPB’s proposed rule seeks to upend many decades of legal precedent, including Congressional intent, to advance the Trump Administration’s unsubstantiated ideological crusade to dismantle disparate impact protections across the federal government.

According to one former CFPB attorney, “the disparate impact legal doctrine was a crucial tool allowing the government to uncover intentional discrimination by banks and mortgage originators, which could become much harder if the federal government ceases to enforce it.” Moreover, the National Fair Housing Alliance stated, “if this change is enacted, this means lenders could freely use credit models that exclude hardworking people.”

The rollback of disparate impact enforcement under ECOA will also increase housing and other borrowing costs, which is particularly unacceptable during the current housing and affordability crisis. Research has shown that protected classes of borrowers under ECOA, including women, people of color, and LGBTQ+ couples, often experience higher denial rates or are charged higher fees and interest rates compared to similarly situated borrowers or even other borrowers with worse credit histories. For example, between 2018 and 2023, Black mortgage applicants were more than 2 times more likely to be denied than White applicants with similar profiles, while Latino and Asian mortgage applicants were 1.5 and 1.2 times more likely, respectively, to be denied compared to White applicants. Similarly, “[s]ole female applicants are [nearly 30%] more likely to be denied a mortgage than sole males.” Another study found that between 1990 and 2015, “same-sex applicants are 73.12% more likely to be denied, and they tend to be charged up to 0.2% higher fees/interest [compared with otherwise similar, different-sex applicants].”

The CFPB’s proposed rule would also stop lenders from establishing Special Purpose Credit Programs (SPCP), which Congress explicitly authorized under ECOA to provide affordable credit to historically discriminated-against groups, in order to help build wealth and close wealth gaps. To address long-standing disparities in the mortgage market, the CFPB and other federal agencies issued SPCP guidance beginning in 2021 that gave lenders more certainty about how to properly implement SPCPs in a way that is consistent with fair housing and lending laws. The CFPB’s latest proposed rule would roll back this progress and instead stop lenders from relying on protected characteristics under ECOA to determine eligibility for SPCPs, creating a standard for implementing an SPCP that is virtually impossible for any creditor to satisfy.

The CFPB’s proposed rule would eliminate longstanding fair lending protections, increase housing and lending costs, and undermine ECOA’s original purpose and decades of progress toward closing the wealth gap. Given our concerns, we urge you to rescind the CFPB’s proposed rule and provide a briefing on your efforts to do so by February 10, 2026.

Sincerely,


Van Hollen, Walkinshaw, Hoyer Launch the Federal Workforce Caucus

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and U.S. Representatives James Walkinshaw (D-Va.) and Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) announced the launch of the Federal Workforce Caucus. The members are launching this Caucus to bolster efforts to protect federal workers and strengthen our merit-based federal civil service so these dedicated public servants can continue to deliver for the American people without political interference. The lawmakers were joined by Caucus member Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and federal employee union leaders and members at the announcement.

Additional members of the Caucus include U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.) and U.S. Representatives Don Beyer (D-Va.), Sarah Elfreth (D-Md.), Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), April McClain Delaney (D-Md.), Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.), Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Johnny Olszewski (D-Md.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Bobby Scott (D-Va.), Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.), and Eugene Vindman (D-Va.).

“Federal workers deliver essential public services on behalf of the American people every day – they are the patriotic civil servants who care for our veterans, conduct food safety inspections, provide aid to communities struck by disaster, and so much more. But from day one, the Trump Administration has relentlessly attacked them and jeopardized the services they provide – as they pursue their ultimate goal of replacing qualified civil servants with political cronies who will do Trump’s bidding without regard for the law. We’re launching the Federal Workforce Caucus to stand united against this Administration’s attacks, to support our federal workers, and to protect the integrity of our merit-based civil service,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“As Co-Chair and Founder of the Federal Workforce Caucus, I’m proud to lead this effort to advocate for our dedicated federal workers and the good government values they uphold,” said Congressman Walkinshaw. “Virginia is home to nearly 150,000 federal workers, including more than 60,000 in Fairfax, who care for veterans, protect our food supply, respond to disasters, and keep essential programs running. Too often, they are treated as political targets instead of the backbone of an effective, nonpartisan civil service. This Caucus will be on the front lines defending merit-based public service and advancing policies to strengthen recruitment and retention, boost morale, and modernize pay and professional development. We will work every day to ensure government delivers world-class services for all Americans.”

"Donald Trump and Russell Vought claim that our federal workers are 'villains' who ought to be 'put in trauma.' That's dead wrong. Federal employees are patriotic professionals who provide vital services to the American people every day. I have fought to protect them from DOGE's crusade, and Congress must do the same. That's why I'm pleased to help found the Federal Workforce Caucus," said Congressman Hoyer.

“Virginia is home to hundreds of thousands of hardworking public servants who keep our country safe and provide critical services to their fellow Americans,” said Senator Kaine. “As the Trump Administration attacks and vilifies this dedicated workforce, we must push back. I’m glad to join my colleagues in launching the Federal Workforce Caucus to protect and strengthen the federal workforce.”

"When federal workers take their oath, they don’t pledge allegiance to whoever is in the Oval Office, they pledge an oath to this nation and our constitution. They deserve our gratitude and respect, yet instead, this Administration has unleashed a witch hunt against our civil servants. The Federal Workforce Caucus is focused – through legislation, advocacy, and dialogue – on protecting our civil servants and allowing them to continue to serve the American people," said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Federal workers in Virginia and across the country are the backbone of services Americans depend on,” said Senator Warner. “As the Trump administration continues to target federal workers and use them as political bargaining chips, it is critical for lawmakers to come together and defend the job security, pay, and benefits of our dedicated civil service.”

“Over the past year, people and communities have protested, lawyers have sued, and courts have issued orders to protect our civil servants. It is an honor today to mark the establishment of a bipartisan, bicameral congressional caucus to support the people who work for all us – our nonpartisan, merit-based civil service. The Congressional Federal Workforce Caucus could not come at a more pivotal time. As the Trump-Vance administration and its allies escalate threats to our nation’s elections, our nation’s communities, and our nation’s civil servants, it is time to use all tools our democracy provides to push back and move forward. We are grateful to these lawmakers for taking an important step to protect and strengthen the civil service not just for today, but for the ability to build the people-centered government we all will need in the future,” Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward in remarks at the event.

“The Trump administration’s relentless attacks on our federal workers are meant to scare those who serve the American people into serving a president’s political agenda. Ripping up federal workers’ union contracts and pushing experts out of their jobs all across the country has made it harder for workers to deliver the essential services we all rely on. As the White House escalates its attacks, we commend Senator Van Hollen and members of the new Federal Workforce Caucus for joining us in the fight to protect federal workers and the critical services they provide,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler.

“After a traumatic year for the civil service, including a 43-day government shutdown and unprecedented mass firings, this Caucus is very timely. Your members’ expertise and commitment will amplify the voice of the federal civilian workforce when it matters most. AFGE stands ready to support and work with the Caucus. Our country depends on it,” said Eric Bunn, Sr., National Secretary-Treasurer, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE)

"The federal workforce has endured unimaginable harm, with over 300,000 employees separated, agencies wiped out and previously nonpartisan institutions politicized. Congress must stand for federal workers, and I believe the Federal Workforce Caucus will provide the venue to press for oversight and serve as a gathering place for all members who have constituents who rely on well-functioning government services,” said Max Stier, President and CEO, Partnership for Public Service.

The federal workforce is essential to a legitimate democratic republic, yet our civil service is increasingly under attack – politically, structurally, and rhetorically,” said NFFE National President Randy Erwin. “These attacks weaken public accountability, lawful administration, and the quality of services Americans rely on every single day. The Federal Workforce Caucus will ensure the civil service is protected and strengthened, and critical services are delivered to the public while maintaining a skilled, apolitical workforce. Thank you to the co-chairs of the Caucus – Senator Van Hollen, and Representatives Walkinshaw and Hoyer – for your continued support of federal employees.”

“The federal public service workers who help keep our communities running deserve dignity, respect, and the security of knowing they’ll be paid on time,” said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. "Unfortunately, anti-worker politicians continue to exploit them to push their extreme agenda. In the last year, federal workers have been fired arbitrarily, stripped of their collective bargaining rights, and furloughed without pay during the shutdown. I applaud the members of the Federal Workforce Caucus for their focus on restoring dignity and respect to these dedicated public servants. It also highlights why we need solutions like Sen. Van Hollen and Rep. Walkinshaw's True Shutdown Fairness Act, which will ensure federal workers don't miss a paycheck or get fired during a shutdown. On behalf of the AFSCME members and the hardworking federal public service workers we represent, we thank the Federal Workforce Caucus for having our backs."

"IFPTE welcomes the launch of the Federal Workforce Caucus. Over the past year, our members who work for the federal government have witnessed unprecedented political interference, mass firings without cause, and unlawful efforts to deny federal workers their union rights and defund federal agency missions. Our democracy depends on a professional, nonpartisan federal civil service that serves the American public with accountability and integrity. We urgently call on Members of Congress in both chambers and both sides of the aisle to join the Caucus and work to uphold and protect merit system principles, due process protections, and a civil service that ensures that science and innovation, public health, safety, economic security, our national defense, and public services are delivered fairly, effectively, and effectively," said Matthew Biggs, President of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE)

“NTEU applauds Senator Van Hollen and Representatives Hoyer and Walkinshaw for launching the Federal Workforce Caucus to highlight the work and challenges facing federal workers across the country. Given the deluge of attacks employees have faced over the past year, from mass firings and illegal attempts to eliminate their union rights to threats against their pay and benefits, we appreciate the dedicated effort that this caucus will make to strengthen the nonpartisan civil service and ensure that federal employees are treated with dignity and respect so they can continue to provide the critical services the American people rely on,” said Doreen Greenwald, National President, NTEU.

The Federal Workforce Caucus will serve as a forum for Members to:

Support and strengthen the federal civilian workforce and the merit-based civil service system so that it can continue to deliver for American families and businesses;

Protect the integrity and nonpartisan character of federal employment;

Advance policies that improve recruitment, retention, and workforce morale across federal agencies;

Highlight stories that show how government programs and workers improve the lives of the American public;

Develop and advance data-informed policies that encourage modernization and innovative practices across the federal workforce in areas such as pay competitiveness, workforce performance optimization, and professional development;

Facilitate dialogue among Members of Congress, former and current federal employees, organizations, and unions representing federal employees, and subject-matter experts to inform efforts to modernize the federal government and attract the workforce needed to deliver for Americans.

“Federal workers help families put food on the table, protect veterans healing from the wounds of war, and empower communities in the face of environmental crisis. Over the past year, they’ve faced unprecedented attacks – mass firings, union busting, and illegal interference with their work – meant to demoralize and deplete the civil service. Federal workers deserve full support from Congress to protect their bargaining rights and their right to do their jobs without political obstruction,” said Senator Markey.

“Our federal civilian workforce is made up of dedicated public servants who keep our government running. While the Trump Administration fails to see the value in these public servants’ work, the Senate Federal Workforce Caucus, which we are launching today, stands with our government’s employees,” said Senator Durbin.

“Public servants deliver essential services on behalf of the American people. I am proud to join this caucus supporting federal employees and solidifying our dedication to a fortified, innovative workforce. Their service is crucial to promoting the well-being and safety of our country, and they deserve the best assistance we can offer—supporting our public servants is an investment in our country,” said Senator Blumenthal.

“The federal workforce is integral to our country and our communities, helping American families and businesses thrive. As this regime attacks federal workers and the critical work they do, I am proud to join this caucus, which will advance policies that support federal workers and the communities they serve,” said Senator Hirono. “As part of this caucus, I reaffirm my commitment to ensuring federal workers are recognized, protected, and receive the support they need to confront challenges and provide for the public.”

“Throughout the last year, President Trump and his administration have used dedicated federal public servants as political pawns. It’s unacceptable,” said Senator Blunt Rochester. “I’m proud to join this bicameral coalition in launching the Federal Workforce Caucus. To the nearly thousands of federal workers in Delaware and the millions around the country, we’ve got your back.”

“President Trump has berated, traumatized and mass-fired federal employees to destroy expertise and science and to remake our government in the image of his imbecilic incompetence,” said Congressman Raskin. “Our institutions were not built by generations of Americans to be broken up and sold for parts; they exist to serve the American people in every age. That’s why I’m proudly standing with my colleagues to establish the Federal Workforce Caucus to defend the professional civil service and the public servants who have helped build our amazing country.”

“The newly established bicameral Federal Workforce Caucus affirms a simple truth: good-paying federal jobs have helped build and sustain the middle class across the country, leveling the playing field while strengthening communities like ours in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area. Public service is the backbone of our country, and these careers should be an opportunity for dedicated Americans to serve the nation with honor while securing economic stability for their families. I’m proud to stand with my colleagues to protect, support, and invest in the federal workforce that keeps America moving forward,” said Congressman Ivey.

“Federal workers are the lifeblood of our democracy, and they perform countless essential duties that our country simply could not go without,” said Congressman Mfume. “They fulfill these duties without fear or favor because they are hard-working, patriotic Americans. I have always been a proud supporter of federal workers, and I am proud to join the Federal Workforce Caucus to work with my colleagues in the Congress on ways to better support the people that make the American government work.”

“Federal workers are not political pawns — they are the dedicated public servants who keep our country running. After Trump’s firings wiped out nearly 25,000 federal jobs in Maryland last year alone, the stakes could not be more clear. I’m proud to serve as a founding member of the Federal Workforce Caucus to defend a strong, nonpartisan civil service, protect merit-based hiring, and invest in recruitment, retention, and modernization so the federal workforce can keep delivering for the American people,” said Congressman Olszewski.

“As the proud daughter of two civil servants and the representative to over 45,000 federal employees in Maryland’s Third District, I am excited to join the Federal Workforce Caucus. The sledgehammer of DOGE not only hurt our hardworking civil servants – it impacted the hundreds of critical services that everyday Americans pay for and rely on. Now more than ever, we must strengthen and rebuild our federal workforce to ensure we continue to recruit the best and brightest into the important tradition of public service,” said Congresswoman Elfreth.

"I’m honored to join as an inaugural member of the Federal Workforce Caucus. Our federal employees and institutions are under relentless attack, with their protections, credibility, and character being eroded with each passing day by this Administration. It’s on us as lawmakers to defend a merit-based, nonpartisan civil service and ensure the next generation feels empowered to answer the call to serve, not turned away," said Congresswoman McClain Delaney.

“I’m pleased to join the Federal Workforce Caucus to stand with the dedicated public servants who keep our government working for the American people, tens of thousands of whom live in the nation's capital," said Congresswoman Norton. "A strong, merit-based federal civil service — free from political interference — is essential to effective governance and public trust. This caucus will play an important role in protecting federal workers and ensuring they can do their jobs with professionalism, independence, and integrity.”

"I am proud to be a part of the Federal Workforce Caucus to fight for the dedicated federal workers in our Commonwealth and across the country. Recent attacks on the federal workforce not only hurt our community, they hurt every single American by making it harder to deliver essential services and earned benefits. I am thrilled to be a part of this Caucus and look forward to continuing to champion federal workers,” said Congressman Subramanyam.

“Federal employees are the backbone of our national security, safe transportation, safe food, and clean water. But as our federal workforce remains under attack by the very people entrusted to lead it with massive purges designed to hollow out or eliminate key federal agencies, and through wanton cruelty targeting dedicated civil servants – I’m joining the Federal Workforce Caucus to stand up for our public servants. Over the years, I have fought to increase federal employees’ pay and expand their paid leave, and I will continue fighting to support the needs of the men and women who keep our country running,” said Congressman Beyer.

"Virginia is home to tens of thousands of federal workers, contractors, and service members who serve with a dedication to country, not political party. As their Representative, a 25-year Army officer, and as the husband of a former federal employee, I know that federal workers are essential to the success, safety, and stability of our nation,” said Congressman Vindman. "I will never back down from a fight to protect and honor those who choose a life of service. I am proud to be an inaugural member of the federal workforce caucus.”

"President Trump promised Americans that he would make their lives better; unfortunately, since taking office, the administration has only upended the lives of workers and their families,” said Congressman Scott. “The Trump administration’s reckless firing of thousands of civil servants – in some cases unlawfully – has left federal workers on edge and weakened public services. I am proud to support the Federal Workforce Caucus to ensure that workers' collective bargaining rights are upheld and Americans can access the earned benefits and services they depend on.”


Van Hollen, Wyden Question Trump Administration Over Secret Process for Tariff Cuts that Favor Politically Connected Companies Over Small Businesses

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS), and U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, questioned the Trump administration’s reliance on a secret, closed-door process for exempting thousands of products from tariffs, which has favored politically connected companies and industries, while small businesses and family farms struggle to stay afloat.

Despite Donald Trump’s initial promise to make no exemptions to his unprecedented global tariff spree, his administration has granted thousands of exclusions, without any formal application process or ability for the public or stakeholders to weigh in on these decisions. At the same time, his sweeping global tariffs are raising prices for consumers, jacking up the cost of making things in America and leaving U.S. exports less competitive in foreign markets.

“Tariff exclusions can mean the difference between life or death for American companies, particularly for small businesses and family farms that lack the resources of their larger counterparts and are seeing their already thin margins squeezed by increased tariff and compliance costs,” The Senators wrote in their letter to United States Trade Representative (USTR) Jamieson Greer and Department of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.

“The Administration’s failure to open a formal, public process to request these exclusions has prevented Main Street from ever making their case to access relief. Small businesses have been left in the dark as to how, when, and under what circumstances relief from these tariffs may be possible. Americans deserve a transparent and legitimate tariff exclusion process that does not prioritize the needs of well-connected insiders over American families,” the lawmakers concluded.

Americans are in the dark about why certain products face tariffs while others don’t. The secrecy around the process and ever-changing exclusions list have raised concerns about corruption and have made it hard to discern any strategy behind the decisions to exclude products.

Both Van Hollen and Wyden have been strong opponents of Trump’s reckless tariffs. In December 2025, Van Hollen held USTR Ambassador Greer’s feet to the fire on Trump’s trade policies at an oversight hearing, noting the impacts of tariffs on Maryland companies that lack the political connections to get special treatment. Earlier last week, Wyden demanded answers about Trump’s Swiss tariffs that were arbitrarily raised and then lowered after Trump accepted a rare Rolex and gold bar from Swiss companies.

The full text of the letter can be found here and below:

Dear Ambassador Greer and Secretary Lutnick:

We write to request information about the process that the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and the Department of Commerce (Commerce) have created to grant product exclusions from the tariffs imposed pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). We have significant concerns that the Trump Administration appears to have created a closed-door tariff exclusion process allowing relief largely for those with political connections. This process has lacked transparency and procedural fairness for American stakeholders, especially small businesses and family farms, and it has opened the door to corruption and economic harm.

The President has unilaterally claimed authority under IEEPA to impose sweeping global tariffs on nearly everything Americans buy from nearly every country in the world. These tariffs have not only raised prices for consumers—they have also raised the costs of inputs, making it more expensive to build, grow, and make things in America and leaving U.S. exports less competitive in foreign markets. Despite the President’s initial insistence that there would be no exclusions or exemptions, the Administration has in fact excluded certain goods from the tariffs, seemingly on an ad hoc basis and through an opaque process that appears to favor the politically connected.

The Administration has granted these exclusions in several waves. First, when the President announced his global tariffs on April 2, 2025, he excluded more than a thousand products, listed in Annex II of Executive Order (EO) 14257. It is unclear how the Administration compiled the Annex II list, and there was no public notice and comment process. Shortly thereafter, the Administration amended Annex II to exclude certain electronics products, including smartphones, computers, and semiconductors, from the global tariffs. Although the Administration indicated that these exclusions would be temporary, they have remained in effect with no timeline for elimination. Then, on September 5, 2025, the Administration issued EO 14346, again amending the Annex II exclusions list with no public process or input. This EO also created the Potential Tariff Adjustments for Aligned Partners (PTAAP) Annex, a list of products that could be eligible for tariff exclusions if imported from a country that has negotiated a “framework agreement” with the United States. The Administration listed in the PTAAP Annex certain unavailable natural resources and certain agricultural products and inputs—seemingly in recognition that the Administration’s tariffs on these products have harmed American manufacturers and farmers. The Administration also listed certain aircraft, aircraft parts, and pharmaceutical products—a confusing decision that seems to be at odds with the Administration’s simultaneous Section 232 investigations of the national security risks posed by these imports. Finally, on November 14, 2025, the President issued yet another EO (EO 14360) amending the Annex II exclusions list, this time excluding various agricultural products and inputs from the global tariffs altogether, despite some of those items having previously been listed in the PTAAP Annex and, hence, eligible for tariff exclusions only pursuant to completed framework agreements. This announcement was a significant and unexplained retreat from the PTAAP strategy unveiled just one month prior, but also an apparent admission that Trump’s tariffs have driven up the price of agricultural imports like bananas and coffee.

Instead of opening a transparent, public tariff exclusion process with objective criteria, the Administration has considered and granted tariff exclusions behind closed doors, through an opaque and unaccountable process that has provided limited opportunity for Americans to engage. To the extent the Administration did consult with stakeholders, the lack of a public process necessarily self-selects for stakeholders that not only have an established presence in Washington, D.C., but also find themselves in favor with the White House. Public and congressional confidence in the integrity of the Administration’s tariff and tariff exclusion policies is further undermined by a lack of information about the criteria and analysis used to determine the products and product categories excluded or eligible for exclusions from the global tariffs—suggesting such decisions may not have been based on any objective criteria or data-driven analysis at all.

In light of the foregoing, we ask that you respond to the following questions:

1. The Administration did not open a formal public notice and comment process regarding any of these tariff exclusions.

a. Please explain why the Administration has elected not to hold a public process.

b. What steps has the Administration taken to proactively engage with American companies, including small businesses, that lack a presence in Washington, D.C. or an existing relationship with your agencies?

2. The Administration has not disclosed any criteria it used to determine what products or categories of products to exclude or make eligible for tariff exclusions. For example, the PTAAP Annex includes products that cannot be produced domestically at sufficient quantities to meet domestic demand, but the Administration has not explained what quantitative analysis was done, or what numerical thresholds were used, to determine what products would fall into that category.

a. Please describe the categories of products that are currently excluded or eligible for exclusions from the global tariffs. Please explain why the Administration chose these categories.

b. Please provide the specific, objective criteria that the Administration used in creating Annex II and the PTAAP Annex. Please describe any quantitative analysis done, including any quantitative thresholds used.

c. With which other agencies did USTR and Commerce consult?

3. The Administration has made several modifications to Annex II and the PTAAP Annex. Is the Administration considering further modifications or additions to these lists? If so, please respond to the following questions.

a. What is the process to accept, review, and assess requests for modification?

b. Will you open a public comment process and publish your decision-making criteria prior to taking action?

c. How will you proactively engage with American companies, including small businesses, that lack a presence in Washington, D.C. or an existing relationship with your agencies?

d. Does the Administration plan to renegotiate the concluded “framework agreements” to reflect any changes made to the PTAAP Annex?

4. The Administration has put certain pharmaceutical products, aircraft and aircraft parts, semiconductors, and critical minerals in Annex II or the PTAAP Annex, excluding them from the global tariffs or making them eligible for exclusions. At the same time, however, the Administration is investigating the national security risks of these imports, which could result in tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. If the Administration believes that such imports may pose a risk to U.S. national security, why has the Administration excluded these items from the global tariffs, or made them eligible for exclusion?

5. While the Administration has chosen to exclude some products from the global tariffs entirely (listed in Annex II), it appears that tariff exclusions for products in the PTAAP Annex can only be secured as a concession to countries with whom the U.S. has concluded a “framework agreement.” But negotiating takes time, and the global tariffs are hurting Americans now. Choosing to put certain goods in the PTAAP Annex limits the relief that can be accessed by American farmers, businesses, and manufacturers who rely on those imports.

a. How did the Administration determine which products to list in Annex II and which products to list in the PTAAP Annex?

b. How are your agencies prioritizing ongoing negotiations with trading partners?

c. Please explain why this Administration has made the highly unusual and inappropriate decision to classify the list of countries with which it is negotiating.

d. Given that the Administration has classified the list of ongoing negotiations, how can the public and stakeholders properly engage with these negotiations and any exclusions sought?

Tariff exclusions can mean the difference between life or death for American companies, particularly for small businesses and family farms that lack the resources of their larger counterparts and are seeing their already thin margins squeezed by increased tariff and compliance costs. The Administration’s failure to open a formal, public process to request these exclusions has prevented Main Street from ever making their case to access relief. Small businesses have been left in the dark as to how, when, and under what circumstances relief from these tariffs may be possible. Americans deserve a transparent and legitimate tariff exclusion process that does not prioritize the needs of well-connected insiders over American families. Yet, particularly given the Administration’s troubling history of political favoritism in its first-term exclusion process, we have significant concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding your decisions to grant or reject tariff relief.

Please respond to these questions as soon as possible, but no later than March 4, 2026. Thank you for your prompt attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,


Warner, Colleagues Raise Concerns About National Trail Program

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) joined 21 of his Senate colleagues in pressing the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service for more information about problems identified in an internal report on the National Trail Program.

“We write with strong concerns regarding a December 2025 report published by the U.S. Forest Service on the status of the U.S Forest Service’s National Trail Program,” wrote the senators. “The report warns of significant challenges in sustaining trail operations and recreation access, as well as potential loss of decades of investments in trail infrastructure.

“The public land recreation economy contributes over $350 million every day to our national economy, $128 billion every year, and the National Forest System (NFS) plays a significant role in that contribution. There are over 164,000 miles of trails in the NFS, with 84 million people annually visiting trails and 143,000 jobs supported by recreation and tourism spending,” the senators continued. “Considering the importance of the National Scenic and Historic Trails statutorily created by Congress for the Forest Service to manage, and the Forest Service National Trail Program in general, the report findings that public access and overall recreation satisfaction ‘will continue to decline in 2026 and beyond without direction to prioritize investments into these programs,' is troubling.”

Along with Sen. Warner, this letter was signed by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Patty Murray (D-WA), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Ed Markey (D-MA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

The full letter is available here and below.

Dear Chief Schultz:

We write with strong concerns regarding a December 2025 report published by the U.S. Forest Service on the status of the U.S Forest Service’s National Trail Program. The report warns of significant challenges in sustaining trail operations and recreation access, as well as potential loss of decades of investments in trail infrastructure.

The public land recreation economy contributes over $350 million every day to our national economy, $128 billion every year, and the National Forest System (NFS) plays a significant role in that contribution. There are over 164,000 miles of trails in the NFS, with 84 million people annually visiting trails and 143,000 jobs supported by recreation and tourism spending. Considering the importance of the National Scenic and Historic Trails statutorily created by Congress for the Forest Service to manage, and the Forest Service National Trail Program in general, the report findings that public access and overall recreation satisfaction “will continue to decline in 2026 and beyond without direction to prioritize investments into these programs,” is troubling.

The report draws on input from 290, mostly district-level, Forest Service staff to assess current challenges facing Forest Service trail operations. It found that workforce shortages and loss of trails expertise, low morale, poor communication, operational gaps, and stalled and unfunded contracts and agreements threaten decades of investments into the Forest Service’s trail system. The report’s conclusions raise serious questions about the public’s ability to enjoy National Forest Trails, particularly as the Forest Service adjusts to a workforce that has declined by at least 16 percent in the last year.

A key finding of the report is that workforce vacancies, hiring freezes, and lost skills are weakening the agency’s ability to maintain trails and effectively leverage partners’ contributions to the upkeep of trails. Beyond staffing challenges, the Forest Service National Trail Program identifies unclear priorities, inconsistent messaging, and misalignment of priorities and resources as ongoing barriers to trail maintenance. The report also highlights deficiencies in grants and agreement (G&A) management as a primary challenge to maintaining Forest Service trails.

Given the importance of this issue, we request responses to each of the following questions no later than February 18, 2026, on the Forest Service’s plan to address the immediate needs listed in the report.

What is the Forest Service’s plan and timeline for addressing all of the issues raised in the report?

Is the Forest Service planning to extend externally funded and disaster-funded Permanent Seasonal Employee (PSE) positions?

Please describe the steps the Forest Service is planning to take to increase G&A capacity in the trail program.

How will Forest Service leadership provide accurate, consistent direction and resources to all levels of the agency to ensure the trails program can implement its mission?

Will the Forest Service consider restoring direct hire authority for the Youth Conservation Corps program?

How is the Forest Service planning to ensure appropriate staffing levels are restored and maintained?

How will the Forest Service invest in training for partners, and volunteers on trail maintenance and operations?

The National Trails System Act of 1968 requires the Forest Service to provide for the development and maintenance of the National Scenic and Historic Trails (NSHT) under its jurisdiction. Given the report’s findings, what is the Forest Service’s plan for ensuring all statutory requirements of the National Trails System Act of 1968 are met for the NSHT under the Forest Service’s jurisdiction?

Forest Service staff and partners are critical to maintaining the over 164,000 miles of trails in the National Forest System. The challenges and impacts in the Program report are deeply concerning and raise questions about what steps the Forest Service will take to maintain the public’s ability to access and use Forest Service trails. We look forward to your timely response on this important matter.

Sincerely,

###


Warner, Kaine Applaud Passage of Five Funding Bills

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) applaud the congressional passage of legislation to fund our country’s defense, security, health, education, transportation, and housing programs. This package supports a number of Warner and Kaine priorities, including affordable housing, safer airways, improved infrastructure, medical research, servicemember pay, and shipbuilding. These five bipartisan bills fund Defense; Financial Services and General Government; Labor, Health and Human Services (HHS), Education, and related agencies; National Security, Department of State, and related programs; and Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and related agencies for Fiscal Year 2026.

“I’m proud to provide over $93 million to 78 critical community projects across Virginia that support affordable housing, expanded health care access, transportation safety and modernization, and job entry and development programs,” said Sen. Warner. “This bill is far from perfect, but we were able to make headway on important national priorities including supporting Ukraine, lowering health care and prescription drug costs, boosting medical research, and funding public housing.”

“I’m glad that we passed legislation to fund important priorities like pay for military servicemembers, and reauthorize my bipartisan legislation—named in honor of Charlottesville native and physician Dr. Lorna Breen—to support the mental health of the health care workforce,” said Sen. Kaine. “I’m also thrilled that it includes over $93 million in federal funding that Senator Warner and I secured to expand access to health care, make critical infrastructure improvements, and more. I look forward to getting on the road to celebrate these investments in our communities.”

As part of the Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations process, members of Congress are able to work with the communities they represent to request funding for local community projects, otherwise known as congressionally directed spending, in a manner that promotes transparency and accountability. This process allows Congress to dedicate federal funding for specific projects in Virginia. This package contains $93.267 million for 78 specific projects in Virginia.

Through strong advocacy, the senators secured funding in the relevant spending bills for the following Virginia projects:

For projects in Central Virginia, click here.

For projects in Hampton Roads and the Eastern Shore, click here.

For projects in Northern Virginia, click here.

For projects in the Shenandoah Valley and the Highlands, click here.

For projects in Southwest Virginia and Southside, click here.

For statewide projects, click here.

This funding is in addition to the $112.14 million in federal funding that Sens. Warner and Kaine previously secured for projects in Central Virginia, Hampton Roads and the Eastern Shore, Northern Virginia, Shenandoah Valley and the Highlands, Southwest Virginia and Southside, and across Virginia as part of other government funding legislation.

In addition to community-specific projects, this legislation includes funding for the following Warner and Kaine priorities:

Supporting public housing: Provides $48.4 billion to the Office of Public and Indian Housing, including $38.4 billion for tenant based rental assistance; $8.3 billion for the Public Housing Fund; $206.4 million to help families get good paying jobs; and $1.4 billion to support housing in Tribal and Native Hawaiian communities.

Supporting community investment, affordable housing, and homelessness prevention: Provides $13.3 billion for the Office of Community Planning and Development, including $3.3 billion for the Community Development Block program to give Virginia cities and counties reliable funding for housing repairs, neighborhood revitalization, and community development; $4.4 billion for Homeless Assistance Grants to expand permanent supportive housing, rapid rehousing, and prevention efforts; $1.25 billion for the HOME Investment Partnerships program to help states and cities build and preserve affordable housing; $65 million for the Self-Help and Assisted-Homeownership Opportunity program to help low-income families build or buy their first home; and $30 million for the SUPPORT for Patients and Community Recovery Housing Program to fund housing for people recovering from substance use disorders.

Improving access to housing: Provides $19.9 billion to the Office of Housing, including $18.5 billion to keep rents affordable in privately owned apartment buildings for low-income tenants; $1 billion for Housing for the Elderly; and $287 million for Housing for Persons with Disabilities.

Improving air safety: Provides $22.2 billion to the Federal Aviation Administration, including funds to support the addition of new air traffic controllers and the prioritization of modernizing outdated systems in the National Airspace. Also provides $2 million for an independent study on the airspace in the National Capital Region and the coordination between the FAA and Department of Defense in response to the tragic Flight 5342 accident in January 2025.

Supporting regional airports: Provides $514 million for the Essential Air Service program, which provides critical support for passenger service for Shenandoah Valley Regional Airport.

Improving roads and highways: Provides $64.3 billion to the Federal Highway Administration, including $350 million for bridge repair and $200 million for the Tribal Transportation program.

Improving rail travel: Provides $2.9 billion for the Federal Railroad Administration, including $137 million for Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Improvements grants; $1.6 billion for Amtrak’s National Network grants for State-Supported routes and Long-Distance routes; and $850 million for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor.

Boosting capital transit: Provides $16.5 billion to the Federal Transit Administration, including $1.7 billion for the Capital Investment Grants program.

Supporting medical research: Provides $48.7 billion for biomedical research, including $3.9 billion for Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia research as well as a $10 million increase for diabetes research.

Investing in child care and early learning: Provides $8.8 billion for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), an $85 million increase, which will help families in Virginia and across the country find and afford child care. Also provides $12.36 billion for Head Start, an $85 million increase, which will support Head Start teachers and staff throughout the country. Sen. Kaine has championed efforts in Congress to increase funding for the CCDBG program.

Boosting education: Provides $70.9 billion for the Department of Education, including $18.4 billion for Title I schools and $15.19 billion for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Both received a $20 million increase.

Improving social security: Provides $15 billion for the Social Security Administration’s administrative expenses, a $554 million increase from the prior year. The legislation includes instructions for SSA to utilize the funding to take steps to avoid field office closures, reduced office hours, and delays for appointments at field offices.

Increasing servicemember pay: Provides a 3.8% across-the-board pay raise for servicemembers. Also funds a 1% pay raise for civilians.

Supporting defense communities: Provides $70 million for Impact Aid programs, which provide federal assistance to local school districts that face financial disadvantages due to federal land ownership or high enrollment of federally connected children. Also provides $30 million for the Defense Community Infrastructure Program, which addresses deficiencies in community infrastructure that can or does support a military installation’s readiness and lethality.

Supporting environmental mitigation: Provides $159 million above the President’s request for PFAS cleanup, which removes “forever chemicals” from water and soil. Also provides $20 million above the President’s request for the Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration program, which preserves military missions by supporting cost-sharing to avoid land use conflicts near military installations, address environmental restrictions that limit military activities, and increase military installation resilience.

Supporting international partnerships: Provides $400 million to support Ukraine; reaffirms Congress’s support for NATO; provides $1 billion for the Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative; makes available $3.3 billion to support the United Nations and other international organizations, rejecting the President’s request to eliminate support; includes $343 million to support regional partners in countering ISIS; and provides $1.1 billion for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities.

Providing humanitarian and global health assistance: Provides $9.4 billion for global health programs to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and polio; $5.5 billion for humanitarian assistance to meet most urgent needs around the globe; and $15 million for rigorous impact evaluations to ensure humanitarian programs are efficient and delivering results for vulnerable communities.

Supporting shipbuilding: Provides $27.15 billion to support shipbuilding, including a $5.9 billion increase for Columbia- and Virginia-class submarine programs; $1.676 billion for the completion of last year’s shipbuilding programs; and an additional $1.75 billion for DDG-51 destroyers advance procurement and industrial base support.

Boosting military capacity: Provides $2.947 billion in additional munitions and industrial capacity across the military services, including $500 million to develop and procure additional solid rocket motors.

Expanding telehealth: Extends Medicare telehealth flexibilities for two years; requires HHS to issue guidance with best practices on providing telehealth services accessibly; continues for four years virtual access to the Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program; allows cardiopulmonary rehabilitation services to be provided by telehealth in Medicare in 2026 and 2027; and directs HHS to help health care providers learn how to screen for medication-induced movement disorders over telehealth.

Lowering drug costs by reining in PBM middlemen: Reforms Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) to lower drug costs for Americans and protect access to local pharmacies. Also includes two of Sen. Warner’s bills, the PBM Reporting Transparency Act and the Patients Before Middlemen (PBM) Act.

Protecting rural health labor and delivery services: Includes a provision of Sen. Warner’s Keeping Obstetrics Local Act to require State Medicaid programs to conduct studies on the costs of providing maternity, labor, and delivery services in rural hospitals and hospitals that serve a high proportion of Medicaid beneficiaries, and submit a report detailing the results of this study to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Improving mental health: Includes the Dr. Lorna Breen Health Care Provider Protection Reauthorization Act, legislation sponsored by Sen. Kaine and cosponsored by Sen. Warner, that reauthorizes programs that support efforts to improve the mental health of health care providers.

Addressing pediatric cancer: Provides $12.6 million to fund childhood cancer research through the Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act, named after a child from Loudoun County who died from brain cancer in 2013.

Supporting individuals with Long COVID: Provides $10 million to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to continue its work to support multidisciplinary Long COVID clinics to address comprehensive, coordinated, person-centered care for people living with Long COVID.

Modernizing public health infrastructure: Provides $185 million to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to modernize America’s public health data systems.

###

* High-quality photographs of Sen. Mark R. Warner are available for downloadhere*


Warner, Colleagues Demand Hegseth Explain Reasoning for Fully Classifying Spending Plans of $90 Billion in Big, Ugly Betrayal Law, Preventing Congressional Oversight

WASHINGTON - U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner joined his fellow Senate Budget Committee Democrats in calling on Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to explain the Department of Defense’s (DOD) decision to classify its budget reconciliation spending plan—a decision that undermines congressional oversight and accountability. Following passage of the Republican reconciliation bill in July, DOD submitted a fully classified spending plan for $90 billion of the $150 billion appropriated for national security. Congress has yet to receive a spend plan for the remaining $60 billion that was appropriated. Not only is there growing evidence that DOD is not adhering to congressional intent, but absent proper oversight, reconciliation funds could be diverted to unintended purposes.

The senators wrote, “The Department has offered no explanation for why the spend plan was classified, even though some items included in H.R. 1, such as barracks improvements or personnel benefit increases, are not sensitive. It strains credulity that all the items in the $90 billion classified spend plan are sensitive enough to warrant complete classification. In prior years, only intelligence or specific sensitive programs required classified spend plans, while other defense budget materials were provided in unclassified form or with classified appendices as appropriate. The current approach deviates sharply from long-standing practice and raises serious questions about DOD’s rationale.

“This decision also comes amid broader transparency concerns. The Pentagon has adopted new restrictions on communication with Congress and the press, further limiting oversight and undermining public accountability. Combined with the unprecedented classification of the reconciliation spend plan, these steps raise doubts about whether Congress is receiving the information necessary to fulfill its constitutional oversight responsibilities,”the senators continued.

In addition to Sen. Warner, Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), and Alex Padilla (D-CA) joined the letter.

The full letter can be found here and below.

Secretary Hegseth:

We write to express significant concern regarding the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) decision to classify its budget reconciliation spending plan. Classifying the spending plan undermines congressional oversight and accountability. Even at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense appropriation spend plans were not fully classified.

When H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (P.L. 119-21), passed the House and was transmitted to the Senate, it included Section 20014, requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit a detailed spending plan within 45 days of enactment and to provide an annual expenditure report beginning one year after enactment. Although the Senate Parliamentarian later determined Section 20014 to be non-budgetary, Democrats were willing to retain the language, but Republicans voluntarily removed it. The fact that Congress previously sought this reporting underscores the importance of transparency in reconciliation budgeting.

Following enactment of H.R. 1, the chairs of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees issued informal programmatic guidance tables outlining congressional intent and requested that DOD submit a detailed spending plan by August 22, 2025. Senate Chairman Roger Wicker subsequently pressed military nominees and officials to publicly commit to adhering to that intent, even though such a legislative requirement would be challengeable under budget reconciliation procedures. Although DOD missed the deadline, media reports indicate DOD provided a classified spending plan to the defense committees covering roughly $90 billion of the $150 billion appropriated for national security.

The Department has offered no explanation for why the spend plan was classified, even though some items included in H.R. 1, such as barracks improvements or personnel benefit increases, are not sensitive. It strains credulity that all the items in the $90 billion classified spend plan are sensitive enough to warrant complete classification. In prior years, only intelligence or specific sensitive programs required classified spend plans, while other defense budget materials were provided in unclassified form or with classified appendices as appropriate. The current approach deviates sharply from long-standing practice and raises serious questions about DOD’s rationale.

This decision also comes amid broader transparency concerns. The Pentagon has adopted new restrictions on communication with Congress and the press, further limiting oversight and undermining public accountability. Combined with the unprecedented classification of the reconciliation spend plan, these steps raise doubts about whether Congress is receiving the information necessary to fulfill its constitutional oversight responsibilities.

In addition, there are indications that reconciliation funds may have been used for purposes not contemplated by law, including paying troops during the recent lapse in appropriations and providing a one-time bonus payment. Such uses appear contrary to congressional intent, which envisioned reconciliation funding as a tool for specific programmatic needs rather than a slush fund for the President’s ad hoc priorities. This underscores the risk that, absent robust transparency, reconciliation funds may be diverted to unintended purposes.

In fact, classifying the spending plan for H.R. 1 risks further turning reconciliation funding into a slush fund—undermining public confidence and risking wasteful spending—since Congress cannot adequately exercise its oversight role.

As members of the Senate Budget Committee, which has jurisdiction over the reconciliation process, and to support appropriate oversight and ensure the responsible use of taxpayer dollars, we request answers to the following questions by February 20, 2026:

What is DOD’s justification for classifying the spending plan?

Funding for specific classified programs was not included in the reconciliation bill. Are any classified programs receiving funding through reconciliation?

Will DOD commit to providing relevant committees of jurisdiction with access to the complete spending plan, including all classified and unclassified materials?

Will the reconciliation spending plan be incorporated into the FY2027 budget request?

Why did DOD transmit a spend plan for $90 billion but not the remaining $60 billion? What factors contributed to the development and transmittal of only a partial spend plan?

When does the Department plan to submit a spend plan for the remaining $60 billion? Will any subsequent partial spend plan also be classified, and if so, why?

Should you believe that any portion of your reply must be provided in classified form, please coordinate with the committee to ensure proper handling.

Congress cannot forfeit its constitutional role in overseeing the defense budget. Transparency is not optional; it is the foundation of accountability. We strongly urge the Department to reconsider this approach and provide Congress with comprehensive, appropriately marked spending plans without delay.

###