Murphy to Rubio: How Are You Going to Reopen the Strait, Bring Down Food and Gas Prices for Americans?

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday questioned U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. As families face a fourth month of rising prices for gas and basic goods due to the Iran war, Murphy demanded Rubio provide clarity on the Trump administration’s plan to open the Strait of Hormuz and restabilize the global economy. Murphy also pressed Rubio on whether the Trump administration was entertaining offering Iran sanctions relief in exchange for re-opening the Strait of Hormuz.

With Iran negotiations deadlocked, Murphy called out the Trump administration’s flailing, mixed messages and the president’s open disinterest in making a deal: “It has been indecipherable, the information coming from the administration, especially in the past several weeks, as we get signals that a deal is imminent. The president said yesterday he's bored by the negotiations. He doesn't care whether we get a deal… What is going to get the strait reopened? Because this is kind of the only question that matters for American consumers right now, and every day we get wildly different signals from the president as to whether he even is engaged in this question as to whether the strait is going to reopen.”

Murphy slammed the Trump administration for escalating hostilities with Iran to an unprecedented level, pushing the US and world economy into crisis in the process: “Despite the differences that existed between Republicans and Democrats prior to this administration on how to approach Iran's nuclear program, the theory was basically the same, that we were going to impose significant harm on the Iranian economy in order to force them to the table to negotiate. What is happening now is fundamentally different. This war and the administration's decision to blockade, has now held the entire world economy and the US economy hostage…”

Murphy secured a firm commitment from Rubio that Iran would not receive sanctions relief simply for re-opening the Strait of Hormuz:

Murphy: So you will not give them sanctions relief just in exchange for reopening the strait?

Rubio: No - that's not been discussed, that's not been offered.

A full transcript of Murphy and Rubio’s exchange is below.

Murphy: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us today. Despite the differences that existed between Republicans and Democrats prior to this administration on how to approach Iran's nuclear program, the theory was basically the same, that we were going to impose significant harm on the Iranian economy in order to force them to the table to negotiate.

What is happening now is fundamentally different. This war and the administration's decision to blockade, has now held the entire world economy and the US economy hostage to the ability to negotiate an agreement with Iran. This is why the entire country is seized by the question of when there will be an agreement, because apparently until there is an agreement, the Strait of Hormuz remains closed. There is a cost to the Iranian economy, but now there is a devastating cost to the US economy. It has been indecipherable, the information coming from the administration, especially in the past several weeks, as we get signals that a deal is imminent. The President said yesterday he's bored by the negotiations. He doesn't care whether we get a deal. I think it's really important for us to understand what your bottom lines are, what you're asking for in this negotiation, what commitments you need Iran to make in order for you to release the blockade, and we hope for them to release the blockade as well.

So give us a little insight into what your bottom lines are. What is going to get the strait reopened? Because this is kind of the only question that matters for American consumers right now, and every day we get wildly different signals from the president as to whether he even is engaged in this question as to whether the strait is going to reopen.

Rubio: Yeah, I think your question gets right to the heart of the matter. So, I think that's a good question. Let me first bifurcate some things. The only reason there's a blockade, the only reason why there's a US blockade, is because Iran has closed the strait, they're firing on commercial ships, and they've mined large segments of Hormuz, international waters, and so the blockade is only against Iranian ships, and it's very simple. The notion is, if no one's ships are going to get out, then Iran's ships aren't going to get out either. Is that we can't live in a world in which they get to close the straits and tell everybody, pay us a toll, or we'll blow you up, but their ships get to go out unfettered, so that's the reason why there's a blockade. There wouldn't have been a blockade if Iran had agreed to do what they said they would do when the ceasefire kicked in, which is they were going to open the straits.

So, let me just focus on the straits for a moment. Number one, what they're doing is unlawful and illegal. There isn't a country on earth, other than Iran, maybe Oman that flirted with it, who's in favor of what Iran is doing in the straits. The Chinese are against it, the Russians are against it, everyone is against it, the whole world is against it. So, condition number one is they have to reopen the straits, and reopening the straits means the following: ships can sail through international waters the way they can do through other choke points around the world without being fired upon, without paying a toll. That's condition number one.

Murphy: But the strait is closed because of our decision to invade Iran. This is a consequence of our military action. So, I guess I'm not interested in litigating that question. We all know why the strait is closed, because you took military action against Iran, and we knew ahead of time that that would be their likely response. The question is, how are we going to get it reopened? Are you going to drive a bargain that is so tough and so hard that the strait remains closed? How are we going to get it open?

Rubio: The first thing, that is a predicate to anything else happening, the straits have to be reopened. The way to think about it is this: if Iran wants to be able to move its oil again, through the straits, they will have to reopen the strait. If they refuse to do so, then we have other options available to us, but we would prefer to negotiate the opening of this-

Murphy: Tell us about the negotiations. What do you need from them in order to get the strait reopened? We need the strait reopened tomorrow.

Rubio: Well, what needs to happen is very simple. They need to announce that they will no longer fire on commercial ships that are going through or threaten to fire on ships, because in many cases ships just won't move, they won't go, not because they got fired on, but because of the risk of being fired upon, and so they have to announce very clearly the straits are now open. We're not charging a toll. We will help remove the mines that they put in there, and they will not fire on ships.

Murphy: But the president says they also need to make commitments on their nuclear program. That's what I'm asking. What commitments do they need to make in order for the strait to be re-opened?

Rubio: The second thing they have to agree to as part of this, so in addition to the straits, that's the predicate that opens the door to phase two. Phase two is they have to commit to very specific negotiations on highly enriched, disposition of the highly enriched uranium that still is buried deep in a mountain somewhere. And they have to agree on negotiating severe and long term limitations, and/or cancelation of enrichment-

Murphy: In the second phase of negotiations?

Rubio: Well, obviously these are highly technical matters, so I don't think you could work those out in five days, that would require a team of experts to meet over a 30, 60, 90 day period and work out the details. But they have to commit to their willingness to do that. For example, they have to commit to say we will dispose of the enriched uranium, and the question now is, what are the mechanisms by which we do so? That can be negotiated.

Murphy: Final question, in order to get to that second phase, are you willing to release sanctions or release frozen money that the United States is withholding from Iran?

Rubio: No. Right now, everything that's been discussed with them is that any sanctions relief - now, remember, there's international sanctions, there's congressional sanctions, there's executive sanctions, some we can release and some we cannot - but any sanctions relief is condition-based, which means it has to be in return for the reason why those sanctions were put in place in the first place, which is their nuclear program. So, yeah, look, Iran is being sanctioned because they enrich uranium. Iran is being sanctioned because they've highly enriched uranium. Iran is being sanctioned because of their nuclear activities. If they agree to give up those things, there would be sanctions relief associated with their commitment and compliance with those agreements.

Murphy: So you will not give them sanctions relief just in exchange for reopening the strait?


Senator Murray Presses Mullin on Urgent Need for ICE, Border Patrol Reforms & Admin’s Claims About Policy Changes

***WATCH: Senator Murray’s full questioning***

Washington, D.C. — Today—at a Senate Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing on the FY27 budget request for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, pressed Secretary Markwayne Mullin on the conduct of ICE and Border Patrol, Republicans’ refusal to enact reforms into law, and the Trump administration’s claims about changes it has already made.

In opening comments, Senator Murray said:

“Well welcome, Mr. Secretary. I think from where I sit, I think it is pretty fair to say that DHS under President Trump has been a debacle. From day one, we saw rampant abuse of power and corruption.

“From awarding millions in no-compete contracts, to companies with direct family ties to DHS officials, to blatantly politicizing disaster relief and slow walking or outright blocking funding to blue states like mine, to making this country less prepared for disasters and leaving communities in the lurch. And then you have the absolutely shameful, unacceptable, un-American conduct we have seen from some of ICE and Border Patrol members.

“After Republicans gave nearly $200 billion last summer in their Big Ugly Bill—with effectively no strings attached, President Trump and Stephen Miller built up a paramilitary force, and essentially promised it immunity, and set it loose on some of our American communities.

“We all witnessed the consequences: a family heading home from a basketball game that was teargassed. A priest in Chicago shot in the head and body with pepper balls. An American citizen dragged out of the house in the freezing cold, in his underwear. Renee Good, Alex Pretti, others murdered in broad daylight. Those actions shock the conscience—and have shocked the world, which is horrified by what’s unfolded on American streets.

“So, going back, as we negotiated the FY 26 DHS funding bill, I fought very hard alongside my Democratic colleagues to secure very basic reforms to make sure nothing like that happened again. Steps like, requiring body cameras—and ensuring that the footage is retained and available, restoring basic training and hiring standards, requiring warrants, ending racial profiling, banning enforcement actions in sensitive locations, like schools, hospitals, and houses of worship. Taking off the masks and requiring visible identification.

“Those are very basic protocols the American people overwhelmingly support—and by the way, police departments follow every day. But unfortunately, after weeks of back and forth—and at times, good discussions and good progress—Republicans did ultimately walk away from the talks to enshrine those protections into law.

“And they chose to instead circumvent Democrats through reconciliation and are now trying to fund ICE and Border Patrol for the remainder of Trump’s presidency—not just this year—without any oversight or accountability measures in place. This is exactly what led to the horrors that we did witness in Minneapolis and across the country.

“And I want to be very clear, Secretary Mullin, I’m watching closely to see what steps you now take as the new DHS Secretary. And I have to say—I have yet to see you take back the reins from Stephen Miller.

“Because even now—we are seeing some outrageous proposals. You plan to withdraw CBP officers from airports in cities that don’t roll over for Trump—that is insane—it is not only dangerous, it would also spell economic crisis for blue and red states.

“Meanwhile, DHS is already on track to break last year’s record for people dying in custody. And last week, ICE agents tear gassed a United States Senator who was simply working to peacefully mediate between ICE and protestors after federal law enforcement, we know, shoved a different Senator to the ground last year. And you continue to deport upstanding community members instead of the worst of the worst.

“Accountability is desperately needed—and I know we will all keep fighting for that.”

[URGENT NEED FOR ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES]

Senator Murray pressed Secretary Mullin on changes the administration claims it has made to immigration enforcement tactics in the course of negotiations that occurred earlier this year over common-sense reforms to the way ICE and Border Patrol have operated.

MURRAY: So let me ask you, throughout our negotiations over the [FY]26 bill, the White House and Border Czar Tom Homan told us we didn’t need to put any reforms into law, because DHS was already making changes like ending the roving patrols, restoring stronger training standards, requiring body cameras to be worn by all agents and officers.

And I know that at your confirmation hearing, you said you did not support the warrantless search and seizure policy the administration put in place and you reportedly were recently talking about legislation to require judicial warrants, restore training standards, and protect sensitive locations from raids.

But while you and Tom Homan say you’ve made some of those changes, the American people haven’t seen the proof of that.

So, I want to ask you today, what are your current training requirements for agents?

MULLIN: Thank you for the question. I want to remind the Senator that I was part of negotiating those reforms and I think you’re aware of that, so I actually know what happened during those.

MURRAY: I know you were not in the room, but I do know you were aware of them.

MULLIN: No, I was very involved in it.

MURRAY: But you were not in the room.

MULLIN: No, I was very involved in it.

MURRAY: I was in the room; you were not in the room. I know you were not in room.

MULLIN: I was very involved in it because we were talking with the House and you know—

MURRAY: It doesn’t matter; I asked you a question. What are the training requirements?

MULLIN: Senator, you know that we agreed to all the stuff you said and the fact is you guys walked away because you had primary elections.

MURRAY: No, Mr. Secretary, we walked away because you would not agree to put it in writing.

MULLIN: We had agreed, we had asked for three and we had asked for nine and we agreed to nine. But you would never get to yes, so we walked away and did reconciliation because we were never going to get to yes between Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and you know that to be a fact. And you can’t pull the wool over my eyes because I was part of negotiating.

MURRAY: Mr. Secretary, you can give your side, I’m telling you I was in the room and we turned—I want to ask you what are your training requirement?

MULLIN: It’s interesting I was involved in that too, if you want to start talking about training, we’re going to—July 1st—we’ll go back to the 71, 72 hours of training. The training policy is going to change a little bit because we’re going to be doing crowd control and fit today’s needs, but all training is willing to change back-and-forth. When you start talking about warrants, I was very clear in my confirmation that judicial warrants are used when we are entering a residence unless we’re in pursuit of a criminal or the criminal continues to evade by going from one place to the next to the next to the next and we’re trying to lock the person down, but I was very clear when we started discussing that. And on the sensitive locations, it has been asked multiple times, we’re not actively being at sensitive locations. We do sometimes have to pick up a felon that is around a sensitive location, but we are not actively patrolling those, and I think you know that to be true.

MURRAY: Okay and can you give this committee in writing what your current training requirements are? You said as of July 1st—if you could give that to us so we can see what those are.

MULLIN: Yes.

MURRAY: How about the updated departmental protocols for agents engaging with protestors?

MULLIN: I’m sorry?

MURRAY: You have an updated Department protocol for agents who are engaging with protestors, can you describe that?

SENATOR BRITT: And the time has expired, so if you could get to your answer quickly then I’d appreciate it.

MURRAY: Well then let me just ask you then, if you could give the Committee in writing that answer, whether or not you have ended roving patrols, and whether or not every officer and agent in the field is now wearing a body camera, in writing so we can see what your protocols are.

MULLIN: We don’t have the money for all the cameras, we had it in the funding bill but since you guys decided not to vote for it, we don’t have the money to put it on all of our officers. But if you remember during the funding bill, we had $20 million set up for it and its currently unfunded because Democrats are refusing to fund CBP. [NOTE: The enacted FY26 appropriations bill did include $20 million specifically set aside for body-worn cameras. See Sec. 109(a).]

MURRAY: We had $20 million in it, and I will tell you this, that that was not enough but what I’d like to know is if you’d respond to that in writing what your current policies are so that we know that they are actual policies being implemented.

MULLIN: We’ll respond to you in writing.

###


Sen. Ossoff Working Across the Aisle to Strengthen Wildfire Response in Georgia

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff is working across the aisle to strengthen wildfire response in Georgia.

Sen. Ossoff is cosponsoring the bipartisan Wildfire Response and Preparedness Act to help ensure quick response times to wildfires in Georgia and across the Nation.

The bill, first introduced by Sens. Tim Sheehy (R-MT) and Andy Kim (D-NJ), would establish a 30-minute national standard response time for wildfires on Federal land. This new standard aims to improve wildfire response time for Federal forest land across Georgia.

“In recent years, the State of Georgia has seen unprecedented wildfire activity threatening lives and property,” Sen. Ossoff said. “This bipartisan bill will ensure that firefighters and first responders are able to quickly respond to these emergencies and keep our communities safe.”

Sen. Ossoff continues to work to protect Georgians from fires and support first responders.

In March, Sen. Ossoff brought Republicans and Democrats together to help the City of Valdosta purchase a fully equipped quick-response vehicle for the Valdosta Fire Department.

Also in March, Sen. Ossoff brought Republicans and Democrats together to help the City of Valdosta purchase a burn building with an attached 4-story training tower.

In 2024, Sens. Ossoff and Rev. Warnock delivered new Federal resources to strengthen local Fire Departments and upgrade public safety through FEMA’s Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG) Program and Fire Prevention and Safety (FP&S) Program.

Also in 2024, Sen. Ossoff brought Republicans and Democrats together to pass the Fire Grants and Safety Act, which re-authorized key grant programs that provide Federal funding to Georgia’s fire departments.

Click here to read the Wildfire Response and Preparedness Act of 2025.

# # #


Padilla Leads Colleagues in Opposing Education Secretary McMahon’s Attacks on English Learners

Senators on the dissolution of the Office of English Language Acquisition: “Dissolving specialized infrastructure does not eliminate the Department’s legal obligations to multilingual learners; it weakens the federal government’s capacity to fulfill them.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) led 19 of their Senate colleagues in condemning the Trump Administration’s attacks on English learners and the dissolution of the Department of Education’s Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA). The Senators emphasized that OELA provides resources and guidance to help ensure English learners and immigrant students can achieve English proficiency for academic success.

In their letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, the Senators stressed that every child deserves access to a high-quality education and an opportunity to succeed, regardless of the language they speak at home, expressed outrage over the Administration’s continued efforts to undermine the rights of English learners, and argued the Department should be focused on expanding its expertise and support for English learners, not dismantling it.

“We write to express our strong opposition to the Trump Administration’s continued efforts to undermine the rights of English learners, including through the formal dissolution of the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) at the U.S. Department of Education (the Department),” wrote the Senators. “We are deeply concerned that these actions combined with significant workforce reductions implemented by the Department will impact the Department’s capacity to fulfill its statutory responsibilities under these laws and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which will have devastating and lasting consequences for the education of more than five million English learner students nationwide.”

The Senators also highlighted the history of OELA, which Congress initially established to ensure that English learners across the nation receive “coordinated federal leadership, oversight, and support.” They further expressed that distributing its functions across multiple offices creates significant risks of inefficiencies, gaps in oversight, and diminished technical assistance for students across the country.

“Dissolving OELA also threatens the nation’s capacity to prepare and sustain the multilingual educator workforce required to serve English learners effectively,” continued the Senators. “State and educator preparation programs rely on OELA-administered grants, technical assistance, and policy guidance to strengthen bilingual teacher preparation pathways, support multilingual teacher candidates, and expand dual-language programs. At a time when school districts across the country face persistent shortages of multilingual educators, weakening federal infrastructure further destabilizes efforts to recruit, prepare, and retain teachers equipped to support multilingual learners.”

Padilla and his colleagues then reiterated their commitment to ensuring all students from diverse backgrounds have access to high-quality education and opportunities to succeed, regardless of the languages they speak at home. The Senators concluded their criticism of McMahon’s decision to dissolve OELA by asking a series of oversight questions regarding the agency’s obligations to English learners in accordance with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Civil Rights Act.

In addition to Padilla, Cortez Masto, and Schatz, the letter was signed by Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

Padilla has been a leading advocate opposing the Administration’s continued assault on the Education Department. In December, Padilla, Cortez Masto, and Schatz led 21 Senators in a letter condemning the unlawful transfer of OELA from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor and demanded the Trump Administration restore longstanding guidance to support English Language Learners. Padilla also joined multiple letters slamming the Administration’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education including condemning outsourcing core Department of Education functions to other agencies and firing half of the Department’s workforce. Padilla also led a letter to the Department to reverse its decision to end federal funding for Minority-Serving Institutions.

Full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Secretary McMahon:

We write to express our strong opposition to the Trump Administration’s continued efforts to undermine the rights of English learners, including through the formal dissolution of the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) at the U.S. Department of Education (the Department). This dissolution follows the unprecedented use of Interagency Agreements (IAAs) to transfer significant programmatic responsibilities of the Secretary of Education under authorization and appropriations laws to the Department of Labor (DOL), including those under Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). We are deeply concerned that these actions combined with significant workforce reductions implemented by the Department will impact the Department’s capacity to fulfill its statutory responsibilities under these laws and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which will have devastating and lasting consequences for the education of more than five million English learner students nationwide.

Today, English learners make up one in ten elementary and secondary public school students – of which a majority are U.S. citizens. These students attend school in every state—in city, suburban, town, and rural classrooms alike. English learners, as with all public school students, have the legal and moral right to access a meaningful, rigorous, and high-quality education.

Sections 209 and 216 of the Department of Education Organization Act require the establishment of OELA, whose Director “shall report directly to the Secretary [of Education]” (20 U.S.C. 3420). OELA is charged not only with supporting implementation of Title III of the ESEA, but also with providing national leadership so that English learners and immigrant students attain English proficiency and academic success. OELA has historically served as the Department’s central hub of expertise on English learner education, housing career staff with deep knowledge of Title III implementation, language acquisition, and the unique needs of English learners.

On February 13, the Department notified Congress of its plan to dissolve OELA and reassign its functions. Without a dedicated office and specialized team to coordinate this work, the administration of programs risks becoming fragmented, inconsistent, and less responsive to the needs of states, school districts, and students. Distributing OELA’s functions across multiple offices and to another agency with limited experience with these statutory responsibilities creates a significant risk of funding disruptions, inefficiencies, gaps in oversight, and diminished quality of technical assistance.

Dissolving OELA also threatens the nation’s capacity to prepare and sustain the multilingual educator workforce required to serve English learners effectively. State and educator preparation programs rely on OELA-administered grants, technical assistance, and policy guidance to strengthen bilingual teacher preparation pathways, support multilingual teacher candidates, and expand dual-language programs. At a time when school districts across the country face persistent shortages of multilingual educators, weakening federal infrastructure further destabilizes efforts to recruit, prepare, and retain teachers equipped to support multilingual learners.

Federal law is not optional. School districts and states are obligated to serve English learners under Title III-A of ESEA, and to protect them from discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Department remains statutorily responsible for administering the programs that Congress has assigned to OELA through multiple authorization and appropriations laws, including (1) Title III, Part A, English Language Acquisition Program, (2) Native American and Alaska Native Children in Schools (NAM), (3) National Professional Development (NPD), and (4) the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). States depend heavily on consistent, high-quality technical assistance from the OELA to implement and continuously improve their English learner programs, effectively use Title III funds, support educators, and meet federal requirements. Research consistently demonstrates that multilingual learners experience stronger academic outcomes, greater school connectedness, and increased access to opportunity when schools are adequately staffed with educators prepared to support language development and multilingual instruction.

Dissolving OELA and rolling back monitoring and guidance does not relieve states of those obligations—it simply eliminates the federal support to meet those obligations. At the same time, the Administration has disrupted critical support systems for schools and states by freezing English learner funding and rescinding longstanding civil rights guidance that districts rely upon to serve multilingual learners lawfully and effectively. These actions have also contributed to heightened fear and instability among immigrant-origin students and families, including through the revocation of prior guidance designating schools as protected areas from immigration enforcement. Taken together, these actions weaken the federal government’s ability to meet its statutory obligations to English learners and undermine the support systems states and school districts depend upon to serve them

Even as the Department weakens institutional support for English learners, federal law is clear: all students acquiring English as a second language retain the right to a meaningful educational access and support. Therefore, we request a written response answering these questions within 30 days:

Will the Department publicly release a transition and implementation plan detailing how statutory responsibilities formerly administered through OELA will be maintained, monitored, and evaluated moving forward?

Which specific offices and staff will be responsible for administering each program previously administered by OELA, including the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA)? Who will serve as the primary point of contact for current grantees and states?

How will the Department ensure the provision of consistent, high-quality technical assistance to states in the absence of a centralized office staffed with subject-matter experts in English learner education? How will the Department make sure that the staff providing technical assistance will have necessary subject-matter expertise?

What steps has the Department taken to ensure that any office or agency assuming these responsibilities will comply with all statutory requirements and faithfully carry out the intent of Congress in serving English learners? To that end, please specify any compliance or enforcement actions that the Department (including OCR) has taken since January 20, 2025, to ensure that English learners are being appropriately served.

Please share the findings of your analysis of the capacity of DOLto effectively carryout activities assigned to it under the IAA with the Department with respect to ESEA requirements related to and programs for English learners.

What role will DOL play in administering Title III programs, and what is the timeline for the transfer in program administration to DOL? Please document the cost to taxpayers for carrying out interagency agreements that shift administration of Title III programs from OELA and the Department to DOL. How many staff from the Department will be detailed to the DOLrelated to Title III ESEA program administration? How has the Department considered the burden of the planned change of grant and payment systems on state and local education systems, which it recently acknowledged when it decided to continue to distribute July 1 formula funds through the Department’s G5 system?

How and when will the Department publicly communicate its plan for maintaining statutorily required functions and technical assistance without disruption?

Every child deserves access to a high-quality education and an opportunity to succeed, regardless of the language they speak at home. Multilingual learners are not a marginal population; they are a vital part of the nation’s schools, workforce, economy, and civic future. Congress established OELA to ensure that English learners receive coordinated federal leadership, oversight, and support. Dissolving specialized infrastructure does not eliminate the Department’s legal obligations to multilingual learners; it weakens the federal government’s capacity to fulfill them. At a moment when states and school systems are working to improve student outcomes that have fallen over the past decade, strengthen multilingual education and address persistent educator shortages, the Department should be focused on expanding its expertise and support for English learners, not dismantling it.

###


Reed Condemns Hegseth Blockade of Military Promotions Across Navy and Air Force

WASHINGTON, DC—Following reports this week from The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has personally blocked and delayed the promotions of dozens of senior Navy and Air Force officers — in addition to earlier removals of senior Army officers — U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, issued the following statement:

“These reports describe an outrageous pattern that is both unlawful and corrosive to the military we rely on to defend this nation.

“Secretary Hegseth has blocked or delayed the promotions of dozens of top-performing officers across every military branch without justification. These officers were all selected for promotion through a rigorous, merit-based process by boards of their peers who reviewed countless officers and chose the best.

“Under U.S. law, only the President may remove an officer from a promotion list. Secretary Hegseth has refused to explain why or how he believes he has the authority to terminate or delay these officers’ careers.

“Women and minorities make up fewer than twenty percent of the general officer corps, yet they account for nearly sixty percent of those Secretary Hegseth has fired or sidelined. That disparity does not happen by accident, and it is a betrayal of the meritocracy that defines our military.

“These officers have served our nation honorably for decades. They deserve answers, and so do the thousands of young leaders under their commands who are wondering if they should continue to serve.

“This assault on our military promotion system is unacceptable. It weakens our nation by preventing some of our best and brightest officers from advancing based on opaque criteria that appears to have nothing to do with performance. I am pressing the Department of Defense for immediate answers and urge my Republican colleagues to do the same.”


Reed: Trump’s Cynical Pick for Acting Top Spy Chief is Dangerously Unqualified

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, after President Donald Trump tapped Bill Pulte, who currently serves as head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and has no background in intelligence, national security, or the military to serve as acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to replace Tulsi Gabbard who is stepping aside at the end of the month, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee and an ex officio member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement:

“This is a cynical pick of a dangerously unqualified individual. President Trump’s desire to surround himself with unqualified ‘yes men’ is one of the factors that misled our nation into disastrous war with Iran. The President should have expert professionals leading our nation’s intelligence agencies, but he prefers sycophants who will put personal fealty to him above the constitution.

“DNI is not a part-time job. Mr. Pulte is the most unqualified person in the history of U.S. intelligence to be tapped for this critical role. He lacks both the experience and temperament to lead the department that oversees all eighteen American intelligence agencies.

“The DNI is intended to educate and inform the president about pressing intelligence matters, not just tell him what he wants to hear or serve as a partisan attack dog. The DNI is supposed to ensure the analytic independence of the intelligence community and speak truth to power when necessary. There is zero evidence Mr. Pulte can fulfill either of these tasks.

“Mr. Pulte has misused his role at FHFA to ignore the law and pursue trumped up allegations against the president’s perceived critics. It is alarming to think what he might do as DNI and raises questions about the DNI’s role in election security. It’s unlikely the guy pushing frivolous schemes like a 50-year mortgage at FHFA will suddenly start providing serious, thoughtful leadership as DNI.

“Republicans who care about national security and U.S. intelligence should be embarrassed by this move and speak out against it. DNI is too important a role to cede to a partisan sycophant with no experience. Our nation deserves better and this could put U.S national security at risk.”

According to President Trump’s social media post, Mr. Pulte will keep his post at FHFA while he serves as acting head of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. If formally nominated, Mr. Pulte would need to be confirmed by the full U.S. Senate to hold the position full time.

The Trump cabinet now has acting officials leading the U.S. Department of Justice; the U.S. Department of Labor; and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.


El Senador Rick Scott habla sobre los próximos pasos para Venezuela y Cuba con el Secretario Marco Rubio en la audiencia del Comité de Relaciones Exteriores del Senado

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Durante una audiencia del Comité de Relaciones Exteriores del Senado sobre la solicitud anual de presupuesto del Departamento de Estado, el Senador Rick Scott preguntó al Secretario de Estado Marco Rubio sobre los planes de la administración respecto a las acusaciones contra Nicolás Maduro de Venezuela y Raúl Castro de Cuba.

"Quiero felicitar el liderazgo del Secretario Rubio en América Latina y su trabajo para limpiar nuestro hemisferio, incluyendo llevar a Maduro ante la justicia y exigir responsabilidades a Delcy Rodríguez", dijo el Senador Scott.

"La acusación de Raúl Castro reavivó la esperanza de una Cuba libre con rendición de cuentas gubernamental, mejores condiciones económicas y libertad política. También envió un mensaje al mundo: Estados Unidos no permitirá un régimen enemigo a solo 90 millas de nuestras costas."

El Senador Scott ha sido un defensor vocal de una Cuba libre. En febrero de 2025, reintrodujo la Ley de Negar Ganancias a la Oligarquía Militar en Cuba y de Restringir las Actividades del Aparato de Inteligencia Cubano (DEMOCRACIA) para responsabilizar al ilegítimo régimen comunista cubano mediante severas sanciones y una presión financiera sin precedentes. El Senador Scott lideró esta legislación junto con el Secretario de Estado Marco Rubio en el pasado Congreso.

El Senador Scott ha liderado durante mucho tiempo los esfuerzos en el Congreso para responsabilizar al régimen de Maduro y enfrentar las amenazas que representan sus redes criminales y terroristas, incluyendo la designación del Cartel de los Soles y el Tren de Aragua como Organizaciones Terroristas Extranjeras. El Senador Scott también ha pedido de forma constante la máxima presión contra Nicolás Maduro, Delcy Rodríguez y otros funcionarios del régimen, ha apoyado a la oposición democrática venezolana, ha abogado por la liberación incondicional de presos políticos y ha advertido sobre las alianzas del régimen de Maduro con Irán, Cuba, China y organizaciones criminales transnacionales que amenazan la seguridad nacional de Estados Unidos.

Vea el intercambio completo del Senador Scott con el Secretario Rubio AQUÍ o haz clic en la foto de arriba:

MOMENTOS DESTACADOS

¿POR QUÉ ES IMPORTANTE PARA ESTADOS UNIDOS QUE EL RÉGIMEN IRANÍ NO OBTENGA UN ARMA NUCLEAR?

El Secretario Rubio dijo: "Si el Estrecho les da ventaja, imagina qué ventaja les darían las armas nucleares para hacer... Esa es la palanca que intentaban construir. Si alguna vez obtuvieran un arma nuclear, no solo tendrían un arma nuclear, no solo controlarían el estrecho, sino que podrían actuar con impunidad, porque no podríais tocarles, no podríais hacer nada al respecto."

¿EN QUÉ PUNTO ESTAMOS EN EL PROCESO PARA ESTABLECER LA DEMOCRACIA EN VENEZUELA?

"Han pasado cinco meses, y creo que Venezuela está en un mejor lugar hoy, y en una mejor trayectoria que hace cinco meses. Ahora, ¿está donde debe estar? ¿Es donde debe acabar al final? La respuesta es, por supuesto, no. En última instancia, para hacer una transición real, deben tener elecciones multipartidistas, libres y justas", dijo el Secretario Rubio.

"Los venezolanos allí ahora, bajo las autoridades provisionales, [no] [suponen] la amenaza para Estados Unidos que [ellos] representaban hace cinco meses, cuando era una base abierta de operaciones para operativos iraníes, para la inteligencia cubana y para otros que la usaron como base de operaciones contra los intereses nacionales, pero tenemos mucho trabajo por delante. Estamos lejos de donde queremos llegar."

¿CUÁL ES EL ESTADO DE NUESTRAS RELACIONES CON CUBA TRAS LA ACUSACIÓN DE MADURO?

El Secretario Rubio dijo: "El desafío fundamental que tenemos aquí es... para que [Cuba] no siga siendo un estado fallido, que supone una amenaza para Estados Unidos, necesitan reformas sistémicas y serias. Necesitan reformas económicas, y la pregunta es, ¿pueden reformarse realmente, dado el pueblo que actualmente está al mando, tanto de GAESA como de su gobierno? Y creo que la respuesta es que sí pueden. Realmente no creo que este sistema sea capaz de reformarse a menos que nuevas personas tomen el control o se imponga una nueva mentalidad."

###


Sen. Rick Scott Discusses Next Steps for Venezuela, Cuba with Sec. Marco Rubio at Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the State Department’s annual budget request, Senator Rick Scott asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio about the administration’s plans regarding the indictments of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and Cuba’s Raúl Castro.

“I want to commend Secretary Rubio’s leadership in Latin America and his work to clean up our hemisphere, including bringing Maduro to justice and holding Delcy Rodríguez accountable,” said Senator Scott.

“Raúl Castro’s indictment sparked renewed hope for a free Cuba with government accountability, improved economic conditions, and political freedom. It also sent a message to the world: America will not allow an adversarial regime just 90 miles off our shores.”

Senator Scott has been a vocal supporter of a free Cuba. In February 2025, he reintroduced the Denying Earnings to the Military Oligarchy in Cuba and Restricting Activities of the Cuban Intelligence Apparatus (DEMOCRACIA) Act to hold the illegitimate communist Cuban regime accountable through severe sanctions and unprecedented financial pressure. Senator Scott led this legislation with Secretary of State Marco Rubio last Congress.

Senator Scott has long led efforts in Congress to hold the Maduro regime accountable and confront the threats posed by its criminal and terrorist networks, including championing the designation of Venezuela’s Cartel de los Soles and Tren de Aragua as a Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Senator Scott has also consistently called for maximum pressure against Nicolás Maduro, Delcy Rodríguez and other regime officials, supported Venezuela’s democratic opposition, advocated for the unconditional release of political prisoners, and sounded the alarm on the Maduro regime’s alliances with Iran, Cuba, China and transnational criminal organizations that threaten U.S. national security.

HIGHLIGHTS

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO AMERICA THAT THE IRANIAN REGIME DOESN’T GET A NUCLEAR WEAPON?

Secretary Rubio said, “If the Strait gives them leverage, imagine what nuclear weapons would give them leverage to do… That is the leverage that they were trying to build. If they ever got a nuclear weapon, not only would they have a nuclear weapon, not only would they control the straits, they would be able to act with impunity, because you wouldn't be able to touch them, you wouldn't be able to do anything about them.”

WHERE ARE WE IN THE PROCESS TO ESTABLISH DEMOCRACY IN VENEZUELA?

“It's been five months, and I think Venezuela is in a better place today, and in a better trajectory today than it was five months ago. Now, is it where it needs to be? Is it where it needs to ultimately wind up? The answer is, of course, no. Ultimately, in order to truly transition, they have to have multi-party, free, and fair election,” said Secretary Rubio.

“The Venezuelans there now, under the interim authorities, [do] not pose the threat to the United States that [they] posed five months ago when it was an open base of operation for Iranian operatives, for Cuban intelligence, and for others who used it as a base of operation against the national interests, but we have a lot of work to do. We are nowhere near where we want to get to.”

WHAT’S THE STATUS OF OUR RELATIONS WITH CUBA POST-MADURO INDICTMENT?

Secretary Rubio said, “The fundamental challenge we have here is… in order for [Cuba] not to continue to be a failed state, which poses a threat to the United States, they need systemic and serious reform. They need to have economic reforms, and the question is, can they possibly reform, given the people who are currently in charge, both of GAESA and of their government? And I think the answer is, they can. I really don't believe this system is capable of reform unless new people take over or a new mindset takes hold.”

###


Sens. Rick Scott, Ashley Moody Introduce the Florida Freeze Disaster Assistance Act

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Rick Scott and Ashley Moody introduced the Florida Freeze Disaster Assistance Act, which would deliver $3.5 billion in much-needed direct relief to Florida’s agriculture community in response to the state’s recent freeze in March.

Congressman Scott Franklin (FL-18) is leading this bill in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Senator Scott said, “Florida farmers and ranchers produce the best food in the world, but this freeze has been tough for them, and the entire agriculture industry. Our state feeds families and creates jobs across the country. Put simply, everyone needs relief here, and that’s why I’m proud to lead this bill in the Senate alongside my fellow Floridians in the House. Our farmers and ranchers are resilient; they will bounce back. It’s time to provide them with the assistance they need to do that.”

Senator Moody said, “While lots of Floridians experienced the historic freeze earlier this year, our farmers were especially hard hit with significant damage to many of their crops. I’m glad to see this important legislation that provides emergency funding to deliver disaster assistance through State-administered block grants. I will continue fighting to ensure our farmers have what they need to succeed when it comes to feeding Florida and the rest of the nation.”

Congressman Scott Franklin said, “Florida agriculture operates differently than much of the country, and our disaster response policies need to reflect that reality. When a severe freeze hits Florida, many specialty crops and multi-year commodities face years of production losses, replanting costs and long-term financial impacts. Too often, growers are forced into a slow, one size fits all federal process that fails to reflect the realities of Florida agriculture. My legislation builds on proven disaster response models by giving states more flexibility to deliver targeted relief, cut unnecessary bureaucracy and help producers recover. For many growers, this is about preserving operations their families have spent generations building.”

Specifically, the Florida Freeze Disaster Assistance Act would:

Provide $3.5 billion in emergency supplemental funding to the USDA to deliver aid through state-administered block grants

Helps compensate producers for losses of revenue, quality and production caused by freeze and cold weather events

Covers prevented planting and damage to trees, bushes and vines & explicitly includes compensation for multi-year crop losses

Direct assistance to counties that received USDA freeze disaster designations issued on March 4, 2026

Require states to request assistance funding through USDA

Winter freezes pose a severe threat to Florida’s agricultural sector. This past winter, Florida’s agricultural producers faced consecutive weeks of subzero temperatures during the states peak berry, corn-growing and citrus season, amounting to over $3 billion in damages of seasonal crops. Senator Rick Scott is committed to ensuring that Florida’s agricultural community has the support they need to rebuild and come back stronger than ever.

Supporting Organizations include: Florida Farm Bureau; Florida Citrus Mutual; Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association; Florida Strawberry Growers Association; Florida Sugar Cane League; Florida Tomato Exchange

Click HERE to read the full bill text.

###


Rosen Leads Democrats Demanding Trump Administration to Reverse Rule Authorizing Social Media Review for Tourists

Senators Express Concerns Over Negative Impacts On International Tourism Into the U.S.

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) led Democratic Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Peter Welch (D-VT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Alex Padilla (D-CA), and Adam Schiff (D-CA) in a letter demanding that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Markwayne Mullin withdraw a proposed rule requiring travelers to disclose up to five years of their social media history prior to traveling to the United States, and end the State Department’s new practice of social media screening of non-immigrant visa applications. International tourism into the U.S. has already been impacted by Trump’s policies, with states like Nevada seeing the lowest number of visitors in 2025 in any year since the pandemic. The U.S. Travel Association estimates that travel and tourism to the United States brought in roughly $1.3 billion in spending in 2024 alone, accounting for 2.5% of the national GDP.

“These policies are further reducing already declining tourism to the United States at a time when our country should be working to welcome more tourists ahead of major international events like the World Cup,” wrote the Senators. “Reduced international tourism is already harming hotels, restaurants, airlines, and the many other industries that rely on tourism in the United States.”

“With this in mind, we urge the Department of Homeland Security to withdraw its proposed rule, ask the Department of State to end its practice of screening the social media history of non-immigrant visa applicants,” continued the Senators.

You can read the full letter HERE

Senator Rosen has fought to protect Nevada’s tourism economy at the federal level. She recently released a video addressing the negative impact Trump’s actions have had on Nevada’s tourism industry. Senator Rosen also called for a Senate hearing to examine the state of the American tourism industry following a year of Trump’s reckless economic and immigration policies. Additionally, Senator Rosen introduced the bipartisan American Decade of Sports Act, which aims to boost tourism to the U.S. through major sporting events, such as the World Cup.

###


Rosen Slams Secretary Rubio for Not Being Present At the High Stakes Iran Negotiations

Watch the Full Exchange HERE

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) slammed Secretary of State Marco Rubio over his absence from the negotiations with Iran in Pakistan. In April, while Secretary Rubio was watching fights with President Donald Trump in Miami, Vice President JD Vance was in Pakistan failing to negotiate a deal with Iran alongside Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, both of whom do not have Congressional approval to be America’s diplomats.

Below are excerpts from Rosen’s Remarks:

Senator Rosen: “I’d like to remind the American people that, as the Secretary of State, your main duty as America’s chief diplomat is to maintain our relations with foreign nations. This is why I was shocked to see that you were at a party with President Trump in Miami instead of accompanying Vice President Vance to Pakistan for the negotiations to end the Iran War…”

“In fact, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner – both of whom were never confirmed by this body to be America’s diplomats – accompanied the Vice President and were in the negotiations. Even Iran’s Foreign Minister was there, yet you were not. I just feel that’s embarrassing for us and it’s embarrassing for you.“

“Mr. Secretary, Congress represents the American people, and we have the power to confirm who represents America abroad. We confirmed you to be in the room where the negotiations are happening and it is just unthinkable that you are not, that you are missing such high-stakes negotiations or that you are not involved.”

###


ICYMI: Sens. Schiff, Kelly, Slotkin Introduce Legislation to Prevent Trump’s Politically Directed Slush Fund, Prevent Future Weaponization of DOJ

Senators Schiff, Kelly, and Slotkin held a press conference to announce the legislation. The livestream can be viewed here.

Washington, D.C. – In case you missed it, U.S. Senators Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) introduced the Drain the Slush Fund Act, new legislation that would shutter President Donald Trump’s so-called Anti-Weaponization Fund and prevent taxpayer dollars from being paid to the President or his allies including those convicted of crimes or those related to the insurrection on January 6, 2021.

The Drain the Slush Fund Act would also prevent future presidential abuse of the Department of Justice’s Settlement Fund by banning any settlements or payments stemming from a claim or lawsuit filed by the President of the United States or the Vice President. The introduction of the bill will prevent any abuse or corrupt settlements from this fund or any in the future.

Read more about the bill here and see coverage below:

CBS News: Senate Democrats launch campaign to kill what DOJ calls its “anti-weaponization” fund

Senate Democrats are launching a coordinated effort to kill the Trump administration’s $1.7+ billion “anti-weaponization” fund. In a “Dear Colleague” letter released Monday, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats will use a variety of strategies, from floor action to oversight, to block President Trump’s “nearly $2 billion MAGA slush fund.”

“If Republicans return to reconciliation, we will be ready with amendments to shut the fund down,” Schumer wrote. “If they try to bury the issue, we will force them to the Senate floor. If they try to sneak behind appropriations, we will fight them there, too. There will be no escape hatch. No fake guardrails or backroom promises to hide behind.”

In addition, a trio of Democratic Senators are introducing a bill Monday to shut down the fund and prevent taxpayer dollars from being paid to the president or his allies, including those convicted of crimes or related to the January 6th attack on the Capitol. The measure, dubbed the Drain the Slush Fund Act, is sponsored by Sens. Adam Schiff, of California, Mark Kelly, of Arizona, and Elissa Slotkin, of Michigan.

“As Republicans return to Washington to provide further funding for this and other mistaken priorities, we’re going to hold them accountable,” Schiff said. “And as Senators who have actually seen their government weaponized against them, we want to make it clear: We will not allow a single payout from this so-called weaponization fund to be paid.”

Last week, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Justice Department from moving forward with work on the new fund. A department spokesperson said it “remains extremely confident in the legality of the Anti-Weaponization Fund which is supported by ample precedent, including Obama-era settlements.”

The $1.776 billion fund would provide taxpayer-funded payouts to people who allege the legal system has been “weaponized” against them. It’s part of an agreement between President Trump and the federal government to settle his lawsuit against the IRS and Treasury Department over the leak of his tax returns.

Senate Republicans are considering adding potential guardrails to the fund as part of a broader $72 billion reconciliation package for immigration enforcement agencies. GOP leaders scrapped votes on the party-line measure last month after a contentious meeting over the DOJ fund with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.

“They (Trump administration) need to help with this issue, because we have a lot of members who are concerned,” Majority Leader John Thune told reporters at the time.

Blanche will return to Capitol Hill this week for an oversight hearing before a House Appropriations subcommittee.

The New Republic: Democrats Are Starting to Fight Back Against Trump’s MAGA Slush Fund

Three Democratic senators introduced a bill Monday to kill Donald Trump’s $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” slush fund.

Senators Adam Schiff of California, Mark Kelly of Arizona, and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan introduced the “Drain the Fund Act,” which they said would block taxpayer dollars from being funneled to Trump and his allies, including individuals convicted in connection with the January 6 riot, public figures who spread election misinformation, and the leader of a violent hate group.

“As Republicans return to Washington to provide further funding for this and other mistaken priorities, we’re going to hold them accountable,” Schiffsaid in a statement. “And as Senators who have actually seen their government weaponized against them, we want to make it clear: We will not allow a single payout from this so-called weaponization fund to be paid.”

The bill would also ban settlements stemming from suits brought by the president or the vice president, and be retroactive to January 20, 2025. That would functionally undo the recent settlement for Trump’s failing $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Services that produced the fund, and blocked the president from future audits.

Last week, a federal judge issued a restraining order to ensure that no taxpayer dollars would be “irreversibly disbursed” from the fund before the legal battle could play out.

But the bill is only part of the plan. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Monday that Democrats would introduce an amendment to their $72 billion budget reconciliation bill in order to shut down the fund. “If they try to bury the issue, we will force them to the Senate floor. If they try to sneak behind appropriations, we will fight them there, too. There will be no escape hatch. No fake guardrails or backroom promises to hide behind,” Schumer said.

The Hill: Senate Democrats unveil bill to block Trump’s ‘anti-weaponization’ fund

Democratic Sens. Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Adam Schiff (Calif.) and Elissa Slotkin (Mich.) on Monday introduced legislation to block the Trump administration’s “anti-weaponization” fund, which the Department of Justice (DOJ) scrapped earlier in the day.

The bill, dubbed the Drain the Slush Fund Act, would bar the use of taxpayer money for payments to President Trump, his associates, individuals convicted of crimes or those involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

The bill would also put restrictions on the DOJ’s settlement fund, prohibiting settlements or payments arising from claims or lawsuits brought by a sitting president or vice president. That restriction would be retroactive to the day of Trump’s second inauguration.

The DOJ on Monday abandoned the $1.776 billion fund it created last month as part of a settlement agreement in Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). That was after federal judges in Virginia and Florida on Friday temporarily halted the fund from making payouts and reopened the president’s suit against the IRS, respectively.

The department wrote on the social platform X that while it “disagrees strongly” with the decision by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia, it will abide by her ruling.

When acting Attorney General Todd Blanche unveiled the fund last month, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle pushed back. Democrats largely slammed it as a “slush fund” for those involved in Jan. 6, while some Republicans argued similarly — with Senate Republicans taking Blanche to task during a May 21 meeting on the fund.

In unveiling their legislation, Kelly, Schiffand Slotkin slammed the fund, with Kelly calling it “theft in broad daylight,” Schiff referring to it as “one of the most brazenly corrupt schemes we’ve ever seen from a U.S. president” and Slotkin saying it is “an unprecedented misuse of taxpayer money.”

That particular trio sponsoring the bill is notable. Earlier this year, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro unsuccessfully sought a grand jury indictment of Kelly, Slotkin, and four House Democrats with military or intelligence backgrounds for recording a video urging military members and intelligence officers to refuse illegal orders.

Kelly, a retired Navy captain, is also embroiled in a legal fight with the Pentagon, which has tried to reduce his rank in the wake of the video.

Schiff, meanwhile, was the subject of a DOJ probe into alleged mortgage fraud last year.

“As Republicans return to Washington to provide further funding for this and other mistaken priorities, we’re going to hold them accountable, and force a vote on this language to shut down the slush fund once and for all,” Schiffsaid in a release. “Americans see the cost of this corruption coming out of their own pockets.

“And as Senators who have actually seen their government weaponized against them, we want to make it clear: we will not allow a single payout from this so-called weaponization fund to be paid.”

Los Angeles Times: Trump’s $1.8-billion fund unravels amid court setbacks, bipartisan pushback

California Sen, Adam Schiff,along with Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, introduced the “Drain the Slush Fund Act.”

The White House declined to comment on whether the administration would also make changes to the tax immunity clause.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is backing away from plans to create a $1.8-billion fund to compensate people who claim the government was weaponized against them, a retreat that comes amid a cascade of legal setbacks and a revolt within members of the Republican Party.

But Senate Democrats say the concession is not enough, and are pushing legislation to ensure no president can ever attempt the creation of such a fund again.

“If Republicans are serious about ending this brazenly corrupt scheme, they should have no problem voting for legislation banning any president from creating such a slush fund in the future,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wrote Monday in a post on X.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) added that Democrats plan to force a vote on a measure to ensure that Trump and Republicans are “truly abandoning this corrupt scheme.”

“Trump’s word is nowhere near enough,” Schumer wrote on X. Earlier in the day, Schumer vowed to force a floor vote to make Republican lawmakers take a public stance on the issue.

Schiff,along with Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, introduced the “Drain the Slush Fund Act” on Monday. The bill, if approved, would bar any payout arising from a lawsuit filed by a president or vice president, language that is designed to permanently foreclose the fund, or anything like it, from being put in place by a future administration.

The White House did not comment on the president’s thinking. But in a statement, the Department of Justice said the decision to scrap the fund was in response to a federal judge’s ruling last week that temporarily blocked payouts from the fund while legal challenges remain pending. The department said it “disagrees strongly” with the move, but stopped short of saying it would challenge the decision.

“This fund was open to anybody who was so weaponized, targeted, or persecuted, whether they were Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Independent, or otherwise,” the statement read. “The Department will abide by the Court’s ruling.”

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, who was nominated to the bench by President Clinton, a Democrat, has scheduled a June 12 hearing for argument on whether to extend the order blocking the fund.

While the court ruling is not permanent, the unraveling over the fund is a notable defeat for Trump, who has cast it as a long-overdue reckoning for Americans he says were targeted by “an evil, corrupt and weaponized Biden administration.” For Republicans who publicly criticized the fund, it may come as a relief as the concept had been widely seen as a political liability heading into the midterm elections.

The Department of Justice created the fund to settle a lawsuit Trump personally brought against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. The settlement also includes a clause permanently barring the IRS from pursuing any tax claims against Trump and his businesses that were filed before May 19 — a provision that, according to an analysis by Forbes, would save Trump and his family more than $600 million.

The White House declined to comment on whether the administration would also make changes to the tax immunity clause. The Democrats’ bill does not address that provision.

“Congress doesn’t need to pass a law to remind the Acting Attorney General [Todd Blanche] that he doesn’t have the authority to grant a blanket pardon for tax crimes by the president, much less when the AG is his personal attorney,” a Schiffspokesperson said in a statement. “The attempt at IRS immunity is corrupt and undoubtedly illegal — and we look forward to seeing it exposed as a fraud.”

Beyond Trump’s own legal disputes with the IRS, the fund was structured to accept claims from anyone who said they had been targeted by the government, a category the administration made clear could include those who were convicted for attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Trump pardoned and commuted the prison sentences of 1,500 people who were charged in connection with the attack, and neither he nor Vice President JD Vance ruled out the possibility that those individuals would be able to receive money from the fund.

KCAL CBS: Challenging Anti-Weaponization Fund

Yuccas: Also, in Washington today, Senate democrats are ramping up efforts to block the Trump administration’s $1.7 billion dollar anti-weaponization fund. Three Democratic Senators, Adam Schiff, Mark Kelly, and Elissa Slotkin are introducing the Drain the Slush Fund Act. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer warned he has several plans to counter potential Republican moves and said, “No matter what Republicans do, we will force them to vote on it.”

Scripps News: Under Pressure, Trump Admin Backs Off ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund, For Now

Reed: Democrats yesterday making clear that they’re going to take the lead on this one, they’re going to force a vote on a bill at some point in the coming days to try and outlaw to try and prevent this weaponization fund from ever coming back or being legal in the future, a law that would potentially affect to future presidential administrations as well. Here’s Senator Adam Schiff in a press conference yesterday.

Schiff (in clip): There will be no hiding from this issue, and our Republican colleagues need to understand that they can join us in disavowing this kind of self-dealing corruption or they’re going to own it. It is not personal to this president and vice president, it would prohibit any future president from doing the same thing. And for that reason, I would hope that we would have our colleagues join us in it.

###


Schmitt Joins Missouri Delegation Urging Approval for New Federal Relief for Recent Missouri Tornadoes

U.S. SENATE — U.S. Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) joined the Missouri congressional delegation in sending a letter to President Trump in support of Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe’s request for a major federal disaster declaration. This comes after the devastating tornadoes and storms that struck Missouri from April 23 through April 28, 2026.

The delegation wrote, “We write to support Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe’s May 22 request for a major federal disaster declaration, pursuant to the Stafford Act, following devastating tornadoes, straight-line winds, severe storms, large hail, and flooding that struck Missouri from April 23 through April 28, 2026. If approved, this declaration would promptly authorize federal aid for affected residents and compensate local governments for their emergency response and recovery expenses in 12 counties throughout Missouri.”

“These recent Missouri storms produced at least eight confirmed tornadoes and record-setting, nearly 5-inch hail. More than 140 households and significant public infrastructure have been affected across the dozen counties. Joint Preliminary Damage Assessments by federal, state, and local officials have documented more than $36 million in eligible damages—triple Missouri’s threshold to qualify for federal disaster assistance. The damage is well beyond the normal capacity of the affected communities to address without federal assistance,” they continued.

The delegation concluded, “We respectfully urge your immediate consideration and approval of Governor Kehoe’s disaster declaration request so that Missouri families, local governments, and first responders can access the federal resources they urgently need.”

Senator Schmitt joined Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), Congressman Jason Smith (MO-08), Congresswoman Ann Wagner (MO-02), Congressman Sam Graves (MO-06), Congressman Mark Alford (MO-04), Congressman Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05), Congressman Eric Burlison (MO-07), Congressman Bob Onder (MO-03), and Congressman Wesley Bell (MO-01).

Read the full letter here.

###


Senator Schmitt Announces $30 Million Grant for St. Louis Lambert International Airport

Schmitt Led the Missouri Delegation in Requesting the Grant, Worked with Trump Administration to Secure the Funds

ST. LOUIS— U.S. Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) announced a $30 million grant from the Federal Aviation Administration that will be used by St. Louis Lambert International Airport to help pay for the construction of a new electricity facility to consolidate its two terminals into one. The grant Senator Schmitt helped secure will modernize the oldest continuously running commercial terminal in the country.

“This investment will help modernize critical infrastructure at Lambert Airport and will move St. Louis one step closer to building a world-class terminal that can serve the region for decades to come,” said Senator Schmitt. “Not only does it have to do with the future prosperity of this region, but it also has to do with the self-esteem of the region,” Schmitt said. “This is a great place in our country, a great American city, a region that has a lot to be proud of, and St. Louis deserves an airport that showcases all we have to offer.”

Background:

Senator Schmitt led the Congressional push for this grant with Congressman Wesley Bell (D-MO-01) and Mayor Cara Spencer.

Since joining the Senate, Schmitt has been a strong advocate for securing federal dollars for Lambert International Airport, including over $7 million for the replacement of approximately 10 passenger boarding bridges and $20 million for airfield drainage improvements. This is not simply a terminal replacement. It is an opportunity to build the most efficient, passenger-focused airport facility in the Midwest. With continued federal partnership, Lambert can become a national demonstration project for modern airport design, efficiency, and passenger experience. As a member of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Aviation, Schmitt has worked closely with federal partners in the Department of Transportation, including Secretary Duffy, Associate Administrator Edwards, as well as President Trump to make sure that Lambert International Airport receives the federal support it deserves.

###


SCHUMER CALLS ON INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE TO INCLUDE WOMEN’S NORDIC COMBINED COMPETITION IN UPCOMING 2030 WINTER OLYMPICS

Schumer Says Many Young Women Train In Upstate NY For A Chance To Represent Team USA And Allowing Them To Participate Gives Overdue Recognition For Their Athletic Accomplishments While Boosting Tourism And Winter Sports In Lake Placid And The North Country

Currently Only Men Are Allowed To Compete In Nordic Combined – Which Combines Cross-Country Skiing And Ski Jumping – At Olympics Despite Increased Women’s Participation

Schumer: Include Women’s Nordic Combined Competition In Olympic Games

U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer called on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to expand Nordic Combined in the Winter Olympics by including the women’s competition in the 2030 games. Nordic Combined is a winter sport in which athletes compete in cross-country skiing and ski jumping. Schumer explained that young women train in the North Country for a chance to represent Team USA, and allowing women to participate is a matter of fairness and opportunity.

“Every year, women from across the country train at world-class facilities in Upstate New York like Lake Placid’s Olympic Ski Jumping Complex and Mt. Van Hoevenberg for a chance to represent Team USA in Nordic Combined. But they are excluded from competing on the Olympic stage because there is no women’s competition,” said Senator Schumer. “As American women excel at the Women’s World Championship, allowing women to compete is about more than fairness. It’s about recognizing their extraordinary athletic accomplishments. That’s why I’m calling on the IOC to right this wrong and allow women the same opportunities their male counterparts have.”

More women have been participating in Nordic Combined, with ten podium finishes in this year’s Nordic Combined World Cup. Team USA women athletes are already inspiring dozens of junior athletes training and competing in Lake Placid. Nordic Combined has been part of the Winter Olympics since the first Games in 1924, but it is currently the only Winter Olympic sport that does not allow women to compete. Schumer said ensuring female athletes have the same opportunity as their male counterparts to compete on the Olympic Stage is about fairness and equal opportunity.

Schumer said adding women’s Nordic Combined to the Winter Olympics would not only expand opportunities for women athletes from Upstate New York and across the country but would also strengthen Lake Placid’s role as a premier destination for winter sports, helping attract more international competitions, tourism, and investment to the region.

Schumer’s letter to IOC President Kirsty Leigh Coventry can be found HERE or below:

Dear President Coventry,

Following the close of the 2026 Winter Olympics and the continued exclusion of Women’s Nordic Combined, I write to strongly encourage the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to expand and equalize Nordic Combined by including women’s competition in the 2030 Winter Olympic Games.

Women’s participation in Nordic Combined has grown steadily over the past several years, yet opportunities to compete at the Olympic level have not kept pace. While top American athletes like Alexa Brabec, Annika Malacinski, and Tara Geraghty-Moats have excelled in the recently established Women’s World Championship, they have been forced to watch from the sidelines as their male counterparts compete on the Olympic stage. The IOC has long been a global leader in advancing women’s inclusion, and this represents another critical opportunity to reinforce that commitment as a growing number of women athletes from an expanding range of nations reach the international Nordic Combined podium.

For New York, this issue is especially significant. The Olympic dreams of Nordic Combined athletes are shaped at New York’s world-class venues, Mt. Van Hoevenberg and the Lake Placid Olympic Ski Jumping Complex, where young women train year-round with hopes of representing Team USA. With strong performances from American women on the world stage already inspiring the next generation, including Women’s Nordic Combined in future Olympic Games would maximize New York’s millions of dollars in investment by expanding training opportunities, attracting more national and international competitions, driving tourism, and reinforcing Lake Placid’s role as a premier destination for winter sports.

Expanding this sport is not only about fairness and equal opportunity for women athletes and providing long-overdue recognition for their achievements, but also about supporting regional economic growth, sustaining year-round use of New York’s world-class facilities, and ensuring New York remains at the forefront of Olympic development in the United States. Adding Women’s Nordic Combined would provide meaningful opportunities for female athletes while inspiring more young women to pursue excellence in one of winter sport’s most demanding disciplines.

I urge you to reconsider and approve the addition of Women’s Nordic Combined for the 2030 Winter Olympic Games.

###


Sullivan Chairs Hearing on The Blue Economy: Advancing American Fisheries, Maritime Strength, and Coastal Economies

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) today chaired a Senate Commerce Coast Guard, Maritime, and Fisheries Subcommittee hearing on “The Blue Economy: Advancing American Fisheries, Maritime Strength, and Coastal Economies.” The hearing featured testimony from four expert witnesses, three of whom are Alaskan: Tommy Sheridan, director of the Alaska Blue Economy Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks; Jeremy Woodrow, executive director of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute; and Nathan Wardwell, managing partner of JOA Surveys, LLC. Sen. Sullivan has led efforts in Congress to secure America’s place in the global Blue Economy through enforcement, environmental stewardship, infrastructure investment, and workforce development.

“The Blue Economy supports millions of American fishermen, processors, mariners, sport fishermen, welders, scientists, engineers, military personnel, charter operators, tourism workers, and small business owners across the United States,” said Sen. Sullivan. “Yet workforce shortages remain one of the great challenges across nearly every sector. We are serious about advancing the Blue Economy. We must invest in workforce development, training, apprenticeships and educational opportunities to prepare the next generation of maritime professionals.”

The Blue Economy is vital to America’s economic strength, food security, and national security, especially in Alaska, which harvests over 60 percent of America’s commercial, sport, and subsistence seafood and holds more coastline than the rest of the country combined.

Click here or the image above to watch the video.

Below is a transcript of Sen. Sullivan’s opening statement in the hearing.

“Good morning. I want to welcome our distinguished witnesses. Apologize for my tardiness, but I think at least three of you understand. I just got in from Alaska last night, and you know what that's like. So welcome, especially to the Alaskans. And this is a subcommittee hearing that examines the importance of America's Blue Economy and the opportunities that presents for economic growth, innovation, job creation and national security.

The Blue Economy encompasses, the industry's activities and, of course, the communities that rely on our oceans, coasts, Great Lakes to create economic opportunities, support jobs, strengthen national security, and sustain coastal communities, including the American fishermen. The Blue Economy is also central to America's economic strength. In 2022, it generated more than $470 billion in goods and services and supported 2.4 million jobs.

It is one of the fastest growing sectors in America, in our economy and indeed the world, encompassing commercial fisheries and seafood, sport, fisheries, subsistence fisheries, maritime transportation, ports, tourism and recreation, and much more. For the United States, and especially for coastal states like my state, the great state of Alaska. These industries and community are not optional. They are essential.

I always do a little bit of bragging about the great state of Alaska here, but when we talk about coastline, we have more coastline than the rest of the country combined. I have a colleague from Minnesota here; I respect a lot. She talks about her state having 10,000 lakes. My state has 3 million lakes. America is a maritime nation.

Our economic success, food security, supply chains and national defense depend on safe, healthy and productive oceans. This hearing comes at a critical time as our nation races to strengthen our maritime industries and secure our place in the global Blue Economy, but so are other countries. The federal government is making significant investments in taking important steps to ensure America remains competitive and our coastal communities, continue to thrive.

Seafood and of course, our fishermen coastal communities remains one of the pillars of the Blue Economy. Alaska is the superpower of seafood, I'd like to say, producing more than 60%. Harvesting more than 60% of all commercial, sport, and subsistence seafood in America, and providing roughly 10 billion meals of healthy protein wild Alaskan fish each year. Our fisheries support thousands of jobs, sustain coastal communities, and help feed both our nation and the world.

President Trump's executive order on restoring American seafood competitiveness recognizes an important reality. Seafood competitiveness is economic security and even national security. At the same time, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing remains a major threat, not just a global fish stocks and fair competition, but to the economic and national security of the United States. That is why my bipartisan fighting foreign illegal seafood harvest, or the FISH Act, which strengthens enforcement and proves international coordination and targets foreign bad actors, particularly China, is so important to stop this illegal fishing, what Senator Whitehouse calls pirate fishing.

We passed that in the Senate recently, and I believe it's going to be passed in the House soon. That will be the most comprehensive IUU fish legislation in the history of the country.

This builds on the bill's Senator Whitehouse and I passed the Save Our Seas Act, the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act, which were the most comprehensive ocean cleanup legislation in American history. And right now, in this committee, we are working on my comprehensive bycatch bill that we introduced last year.

We are hoping to mark that up. That will be the most comprehensive bycatch legislation in American history. Healthy oceans are both an environmental priority and an economic necessity and a national security issue. Tourism, charter fishing, wildlife viewing and countless small businesses depend on sustainable fisheries and healthy marine ecosystems. Alaska is also seeing exciting innovation through our growing mariculture industry, where kelp and shellfish growers are creating new opportunities and jobs in coastal communities.

Science and data collection are foundational to the long-term success of the American Blue Economy. Fisheries, fishery surveys and stock assessments support sustainable fisheries management, and that is NOAA's key mission in this committee reminds them of that very regularly. Likewise, hydrographic services, including coastal mapping, charting and biometric surveys are essential for safe navigation, commerce and maritime operations across every sector of the American Blue Economy.

Advancing our Blue Economy also requires strengthening America's maritime transportation network; ports, marine highways, vessels, terminals, and logistics systems are essential to moving goods supporting coastal states, maintaining resilient supply chains while enhancing our national security. That is why the administration's maritime action plan is so important. Strengthening America's maritime transportation will require long term investment, workforce development, and strong public private partnerships that improve port capacity, modern infrastructure, support domestic vessel operators and ensure reliable transportation networks for coastal communities within and across states.

Tourism is another driver of the American Blue Economy. Visitors bring significant revenue directly to our local communities, making it important that America remains competitive as a global destination. That is why I introduced the Visit USA Act to fully fund Brand USA, the public private partnership responsible for promoting the United States as an international travel destination. Ultimately, this all comes back to people.

The Blue Economy supports millions of American fishermen, processors, mariners, sport fishermen, welders, scientists, engineers, military personnel, charter operators, tourism workers, and small business owners across the United States. Yet workforce shortages remain one of the great challenges across nearly every sector. We are serious about advancing the Blue Economy. We must invest in workforce development, training, apprenticeships and educational opportunities to prepare the next generation of maritime professionals.

The United States possesses some of the richest ocean resources in the world, the best managed fisheries in the world. With the right investments, policies and partnerships, we can unlock the full potential of America's Blue Economy while strengthening our economic and national security and supporting coastal communities for generations to come. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today, many of whom traveled far from the great state of Alaska like I did last night, and to opportunities ahead, challenges they face and the policies needed to ensure a strong and prosperous maritime future in Blue Economy for America.”

# # #


Sullivan, Moody Lead Effort to Uncover Improper Health Care Billing Practices That Lead to High Levels of Medical Debt

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and Ashley Moody (R-Florida) are urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to uncover improper health care billing practices that lead to high levels of medical debt. Instances of high medical debt continue to be a top concern for Americans, and there are reports that indicate hospital bills charged to uninsured patients that end up as medical debt are often well in excess of the actual cost of providing the service.

“We are writing to request you investigate and provide recommendations to Congress for addressing inappropriate health care billing practices that lead to high levels of medical debt,” said the Senators. “Despite efforts by Congress and the Administration to insulate patients from ‘surprise’ medical bills in the No Surprises Act, after four years of runaway inflation and increasing health costs under the Biden administration, instances of high medical debt continue to be a top concern for our constituents.”

BACKGROUND:

While most medical debt sent to collections is under $300, approximately 14 million Americans owe over $1,000. Three million have incurred medical debt that exceeds $10,000, representing almost 80 percent of the aggregate medical debt owed in the United States.

High hospital bills have been a key factor for those suffering from high levels of medical debt. Almost 70 percent of Americans with medical debt under $1,000 reported having no hospital bills at all, but over 70 percent of those with debt over $1,000 reporting owing debt to hospitals, according to a 2022 survey.

Just last month, an investigation found “facilities on average charge the uninsured almost five times what Medicare pays for the same procedure.”

Senators Sullivan and Moody are directing HHS to investigate root causes of instances of inordinately high medical debt and provide recommendations to Congress.

Read the letter here.

# # #


Thune Commemorates C-SPAN’s 40th Senate Anniversary and Discusses Recent Work in South Dakota

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, as we begin our proceedings this morning, I want to take a moment to recognize a milestone here in the Senate.

“On this day 40 years ago, C-SPAN broadcast the United States Senate for the very first time.

“On June 2, 1986, the American people were able to turn on their televisions and see the Senate come to order and their senators engage in debate until the gavel dropped later that day.

“Gavel-to-gavel coverage, Mr. President.

“That’s the C-SPAN way.

“And over the last 40 years, C-SPAN hasn’t missed a beat.

“It’s captured 43,830 hours of Senate proceedings.

“Broadcast 169,000 speeches by hundreds of United States senators who have served in these halls.

“And captured the moments large and small – historic and human – that make up the United States Senate.

“Mr. President, on that day, that first day 40 years ago, the Senate was considering an education bill.

“And what a fitting topic of discussion for C-SPAN’s first day covering this chamber.

“Education is C-SPAN’s entire mission.

“C-SPAN urges its viewers to ‘Make Up Your Own Mind.’

“And for 40 years, C-SPAN has enabled the American people to make up their own minds about what we do here in the Senate.

“It’s helped countless American students see the legislative process in action.

“And it’s ensured that what happens here is lost neither to the day’s news cycle nor to history.

“And I trust that C-SPAN will continue to offer the American people a front-row seat to the Senate for many decades to come.

“Mr. President, C-SPAN captures a lot of our work here in Washington, but just as important is the work that senators do back in our states.

“Last week, the cameras were off here in the chamber, and senators were back at home hearing from the people that we all represent.

“I spent last week back home in South Dakota, traveling around my state and hearing directly from South Dakotans.

“I had a chance to catch up with the mayors of Webster and Lennox.

“Mayor Danny Fergen of Lennox took me around his city.

“He showed me new housing developments in Lennox.

“I saw the city’s infrastructure needs.

“And we went down Main Street to a few businesses, including El Mariachi restaurant.

“Mr. President, I also spent some time up in northeastern South Dakota.

“As I mentioned, I met with the mayor of Webster, Mike Grosek.

“And I dropped by a few local businesses that are benefiting from the permanent tax relief Republicans delivered in the Working Families Tax Cuts.

“I went to the Three22 Kitchen and Cocktails in Aberdeen and saw the Main Street expansion that the owners have undertaken, including the first rooftop lounge in the city.

“I visited ‘Quite Possibly the Coolest Store Ever,’ the Hitch’n Post, a family-owned business that has been an icon in Aberdeen for over 50 years and was recently named one of America’s best western retailers.

“And then over at the Meathouse in Andover, I had a conversation about the local agricultural economy … with the ranchers … who run that business and who take pride in their home-raised beef.

“Mr. President, I’ve [also] valued the opportunity I’ve had lately to spend some time hearing from South Dakota’s young people.

“This past month, I’ve been in classrooms in Winner, Rapid City, and Sioux Falls.

“And we’ve had a number of school groups visiting Washington, D.C., as well.

“I attended the Dakota Relays at the beginning of May and then the state track meet this past Friday.

“And last week, I had the privilege of speaking at Boys State at Northern State University and then at Girls State at the University of South Dakota in Vermillion.

“Mr. President, it’s always a pleasure to get to talk with young people and to hear what’s on their minds and what their dreams are for their futures.

“And I suppose, Mr. President, that’s because on any given day here in the Senate, that’s what our focus as Republicans boils down to: cultivating a brighter future for young people and for all Americans.

“A future that’s secure.

“With greater prosperity.

“And more opportunities to get ahead.

“That’s our focus here in the Senate, Mr. President.

“And it’s what we continue to work toward every day.”


Thune on Republicans’ Fight to Secure America

Clickhere to watch the video.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today spoke at a press conference with Senate Republican leadership:

Thune’s remarks below (as delivered):

“Last Thursday was the 102nd anniversary of the Border Patrol in this country.

“And as we celebrate 250 years for America, I think it’s interesting to also observe that we have had an agency like … Border Patrol defending our borders now for over 100 years.

“And if you think about what they’ve done just in this last year, it’s pretty remarkable, because what we inherited from the Biden administration was the most open border that we’ve ever seen – literally millions of people crawling, pouring across the border, literally every single year, illegally.

“And in a year’s time, Border Patrol has completely cleaned that up, to the point, as, I think it was the month of April, there was an entire year where there hadn’t been a single illegal released into the country.

“And so a truly remarkable record and a tribute to the men and women, the dedicated men and women who make the Border Patrol work.

“And Rodney Scott, the commissioner, has said that the mission of the Border Patrol has never changed; what has changed is that now their members, their agents, are able to do their jobs, the jobs that lawfully we ask them to do.

“And so, tremendous change from one administration to the other, literally, in the time span of a year, Border Patrol has done just a truly incredible job of securing our southern border.

“And that’s what we are committed to doing as Republicans here in the Senate, and we, as we move forward on the Secure [America] Act this week, intend to ensure that law enforcement – both ICE and CBP – have the resources they need to carry out the responsibilities that they are given by the American people.

“And I believe the American people are on our side on this issue.

“They do not want to defund the police, they don’t want open borders.

“Those are Democrat policies.

“Republican policies are to have the back of law enforcement to ensure they have the resources, the personnel, the technology – everything they need to keep our border secure – and to ensure that our nation’s laws are enforced, so that our communities in this country can be safe and secure for the people who live here, for our families.”


Maryland Congressional Delegation Announces $1.3 Million to Reduce the DNA Backlog at Local Police Departments and Crime Labs

Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.) announced $1,322,514 in federal funding to help relieve backlogs of forensic biology and DNA testing impacting Maryland crime labs and local police departments. The funding will help these departments address staffing shortages, provide training, and purchase equipment to increase DNA processing capacity.

“Backlogs in DNA processing can create roadblocks to solving many violent and non-violent crimes. This federal investment will equip local jurisdictions with the tools and resources to process evidence more efficiently and deliver accurate, timely results for the good of Maryland communities,” said the lawmakers.

The lawmakers announced the following grants:

$417,514 to the Maryland State Police Forensic Sciences Division in Pikesville to outsource approximately 168 CODIS-eligible cases to a private laboratory, acquire three mini centrifuges to replace outdated equipment, maintain support for STRmix probabilistic genotyping software, purchase DBLR software to improve the analysis of complex mixtures, and provide 20 continuing education opportunities for staff.

$394,000 to the Baltimore Police Department Crime Laboratory to support the salaries of two sample processing scientists and two sample screening scientists, and to train forensic scientists to continue producing accurate DNA analyses.

$298,000 to the Baltimore County Police Department Crime Laboratory to obtain training and software upgrades to strengthen staff expertise in DNA mixture interpretation and to purchase equipment such as pipettes, a PCR hood, evidence drying lockers, and tablets.

$119,000 to the Montgomery County Police Crime Laboratory to outsource 11–17 DNA cases to an accredited and licensed laboratory and purchase 15 laptops and 5 rolling carts to enhance mobility, streamline documentation, and support software for DNA interpretation.

$94,000 to the Prince George’s County Police Department, Forensic Science Division, to outsource DNA evidence from backlogged cases.

The funding comes from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) at the Department of Justice through the DNA Capacity Enhancement and Backlog Reduction (CEBR) program, which the lawmakers have continued to support with robust funding through Congress’s annual appropriations process.