Durbin Slams DOJ “Deal” On “Anti-Weaponization” Slush Fund During Senate Judiciary Committee Markup On Todd Blanche’s Nomination To Be Attorney General

Durbin: “The parties could still sue to enforce the agreement and the cop-beaters fund can easily be revived with a new DOJ order the day after Mr. Blanche is confirmed.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, delivered an opening statement during today’s Senate Judiciary Committee executive business meeting where he spoke against the nomination of Todd Blanche, President Trump’s pick to be U.S. Attorney General.

Durbin slammed Blanche’s so-called “deal” to kill the “anti-weaponization” fund. During his opening, Durbin noted Mr. Blanche’s statements on the slush fund and the IRS immunity agreement are not signed by the parties to the settlement agreement and are therefore unenforceable. The parties could still sue to enforce the agreement and the cop-beaters fund can easily be revived with a new DOJ order the day after Mr. Blanche is confirmed.

In addition to the slush fund, Durbin also noted Mr. Blanche is not qualified to be the Attorney General due to his mishandling of the Epstein files and failing the survivors of Epstein’s abuse, weaponizing DOJ, acting as President Trump’s personal attorney, obtaining thousands in crypto assets and enriching the President, and purging career DOJ officials.

Key Quotes:

“The political escapade of the last week has made it clearer than ever that Todd Blanche has no business serving as our nation’s chief law enforcement officer. Two Republican members of this Committee said they would not vote for Mr. Blanche unless the J6 cop-beater slush fund was permanently and irrevocably terminated… President Trump responded as we might have guessed as he always does—by doubling down on his position and personally attacking these members.”

“To my Republican colleagues: you gave Mr. Blanche the benefit of the doubt when you supported his nomination to be Deputy Attorney General. Seventeen months later, there is no doubt where his loyalty will lie… Mr. Blanche engineered an agreement, an understanding, a settlement, you name it, that said Donald Trump will never be held responsible for any violations of tax crimes before the date of this document that was signed.”

“Prior to his hearing, Mr. Blanche told me he ‘made a mistake’ by creating the January 6 slush fund… But when I asked him about this under oath, Mr. Blanche falsely claimed that he never made this statement. Mr. Blanche’s willingness to casually lie under oath about a statement he made in a room full of witnesses shows the lengths he will go to avoid offending President Trump.”

“Mr. Blanche claimed that he would recuse himself from matters involving President Trump in his personal capacity. Yet, he personally signed the agreement releasing President Trump, his family, and Trump businesses from tax liability.”

“One of Mr. Blanche’s first acts as Deputy Attorney General was to issue a memo gutting DOJ’s crypto-crime enforcement, which allowed the President to rake in a $1.4 billion crypto windfall in the last year, even as Americans reported billions of dollars in crypto fraud losses. Meanwhile, Mr. Blanche still held, through his children and grandchildren, at least $150,000 in crypto assets.”

“When scrutiny of the Epstein cover-up intensified, Mr. Blanche participated in secret meetings in the White House Situation Room to strategize about protecting Trump, not Epstein survivors. Mr. Blanche volunteered to interview convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, a transparent attempt to exonerate President Trump. Just days later, she was transferred to a minimum-security camp, which is unheard of for serious offenders like her.”

“Mr. Blanche agreed to meet with Epstein survivors—after months of pleas—only when his nomination was in jeopardy… And when he finally met with them, it was [for] only an hour… It is clear that Mr. Blanche hopes to sweep the Epstein scandal under the rug. I thank the [Epstein] survivors here in the room today and around the country for continuing to advocate for all survivors and speak truth to power.”

“Mr. Blanche has played a key role in terminating thousands of DOJ officials… The goal is clear: to replace these DOJ officials with unqualified MAGA loyalists who will rubberstamp President Trump’s corruption. Under Mr. Blanche’s leadership, more than 16,000 employees have left the Department—including more than a quarter of its attorneys.”

“This isn’t about Democrats vs. Republicans. This is about the rule of law vs. lawlessness. The Attorney General is supposed to be the people’s lawyer. DOJ should work on behalf of the American people. Mr. Blanche continues to operate as President Trump’s personal lawyer, treating the Justice Department like a law firm serving one client—the President.”

“The President has made it clear that he plans to keep Mr. Blanche in place as Acting Attorney General, a damning comment on his capacity to honorably serve in this role. This Committee does not need to legitimate Mr. Blanche’s appointment by providing our consent.”

Video of Durbin’s opening statement is available here.

Audio of Durbin’s opening statement is available here.

Footage of Durbin’s opening statement is available here for TV Stations.

-30-


Durbin Sounds Alarm On The Trump Administration Upending Head Start & Continuing Attacks On Special Education

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) today questioned witnesses at Senator Mazie Hirono’s (D-HI) spotlight forum entitled “Breaking the Promise: How Relocating the IDEA Will Be Detrimental to Students and Families.” During the forum, Durbin sounded the alarm on the Trump Administration’s plans to shuffle the Department of Education’s (ED) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), an agency that lacks the experience and expertise to help students with disabilities access a public education.

“They [the Trump Administration] doesn’t have sensitivity to issues like racial disparity but they seem to want to fly right into the face of it to re-write history where they can [and] to eliminate programs that are arguing for equality… The Department of Education was created in the 1960s and I think for the same purpose [as Head Start]—to make sure the school districts of America fought [for] fairness when it came to giving kids a chance and now the Trump Administration wants to dismantle that effort,” said Durbin.

Durbin first asked Ms. Valerie Williams, the former Director of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) under the Biden Administration, whether HHS and ED serve different purposes. Ms. Williams responded that Durbin is “not wrong” and that Congress and special education advocates must continue to support public education for both students with disabilities and low-income students.

Durbin went on to speak about the importance of special education.

“I don’t think what this Administration is proposing is helping whatsoever [with special education programs].” Durbin stated.

Ms. Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States, a national organization advocating for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, responded that Durbin’s sentiments about special education and this Administration are “spot on.” She continued to note that the public education system needs to be better at teaching students with learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, with the tools they need to succeed.

During the forum, Durbin reflected on his education growing up in East St. Louis, Illinois, and the need for the surrounding public schools to succeed so the communities succeed.

Durbin concluded, “[T]his Administration… is squeezing [school districts] when it comes to… resources and discouraging a generation of special ed[ucation] teachers in the process.”

Video of Durbin’s questions are available here.

Audio of Durbin’s questions are available here.

Footage of Durbin’s questions in the spotlight forum is available here for TV Stations.

The hearing examined how the Trump Administration’s interagency agreements (IAAs)—which shift significant administrative responsibilities from the Department of Education (ED) to the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Justice (DOJ)—could affect students with disabilities and their families.

-30-


Gallego, Colleagues Probe Insurance Companies on Usage of Credit-Based Insurance Scores As Costs Rise

“Insurers should not charge consumers higher premiums simply because of their personal credit history, which could have been impacted by job loss, a surprise medical bill, predatory lending, or simply inaccurate information, rather than the actual risk associated with a home.”

WASHINGTON – Today, Senator and Member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), and 19 other members of Congress sent letters to USAA, State Farm, Progressive, Liberty Mutual, Farmers, and Allstate requesting information on the usage of credit-based insurance scores in homeowners insurance underwriting and pricing.


Gallego Introduces Bill to Put Parents in Control of Their Children’s Social Media

WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) introduced the Parental Approval for Youth Social Media Act, legislation that would require social media platforms to obtain parental consent before children under 16 can create or maintain accounts on their platforms.

“Every study tells us the same thing: social media is poisoning our kids’ developing minds. When unsupervised online, they can be exposed to explicit material, recruited by drug or sex traffickers, or cyber bullied. Meanwhile, Big Tech is profiting off of that very screen time. It’s more than time we set a federal policy to protect our children,” said Senator Gallego.

Social media is used by nearly 95% of teenagers and has been linked to mental health and developmental harms. Platform features like recommendation algorithms and engagement-maximizing designs may worsen those effects.

The Parental Approval for Youth Social Media Act would:

Prohibit children under 16 from creating or maintaining social media accounts by default.

Allow a parent or legal guardian to authorize an account for their child if they choose.

Require social media companies to provide parent-supervised accounts, giving parents meaningful tools to oversee and manage their child’s use of the platform.

Require platforms to verify users’ ages and parental authorization before allowing minors to access social media.

The bill exempts email, text messaging, educational platforms, video conferencing services, and online gaming or other services where social interaction is incidental to the primary function.

Last week, Senator Gallego spoke with ABC15 about the proposed bill. Click here for more coverage from The Hill.


Gillibrand, Schiff, And Colleagues Press Trump Administration On Chaotic, Opaque Oversight Of New Artificial Intelligence Models

Today, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Senate Armed Services Committee, led four of her Senate Democratic colleagues in pressing the Trump administration for answers about its unpredictable oversight of frontier artificial intelligence (AI) models and its opaque standards for evaluating a model’s national security risk. The letter follows the Trump administration’s recent haphazard responses to frontier models from Anthropic and OpenAI, and comes as basic questions surround the implementation of Executive Order 14409, the White House’s voluntary pre-release review framework for frontier models.

“The Trump administration’s unfocused, ad-hoc approach to AI risks America’s economic security and competitiveness,” said Senator Gillibrand. “The American people and leading AI companies need clear rules, not constantly changing dictates from the White House. Current administration policy is a disaster, failing to address security risks while threatening American innovation and pushing the world to Chinese alternatives. To safeguard the American people, protect American models and secure American economic leadership on the world stage, I’m demanding the administration work with Congress to establish a transparent, durable, and standardized regulatory AI framework.’

In addition to Gillibrand, the letter was signed by Senators Chris Coons (D-DE), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Adam Schiff (D-CA), and Mark Warner (D-VA).

In the letter, the senators expressed their support for maintaining the United States’ competitive lead in AI development while protecting the country from serious national security risks. However, they stressed that continued reliance on ad hoc, case-by-case regulation will not sufficiently address the cybersecurity and other risks frontier AI models pose. The senators also warned that without consistent policy governing American models, consumers and businesses would be incentivized to migrate to models from foreign vendors, including those based in the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

“Last month provided a dramatic example of these potential risks. During an internal evaluation, OpenAI models escaped their testing environment and used high-level technical capabilities to compromise a third party’s network without any instructions to take those actions. The Federal Government cannot be passive as these capabilities emerge. At the same time, the administration’s recent actions surrounding access to advanced U.S. AI models have raised serious concerns about process, transparency, and strategic effect. On June 12, 2026, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) utilized an infrequently used authority to direct Anthropic to suspend all access to its Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models for foreign nationals (including foreign national employees inside the United States) citing an undisclosed national security concern later described as a narrow jailbreak finding. Because the directive took effect immediately and Anthropic had no reliable way to verify users’ nationality in real time, the company was forced to disable both models for all users worldwide within hours. Over the following eighteen days, the Department and Anthropic negotiated a resolution outside of public view: a partial restoration of Mythos 5 to a defined set of trusted partners on June 26, followed by a full lifting of the export controls on June 30,” the senators wrote.

The senators continued, “While the Administration may have been responding to real security concerns to protect the United States, even justifiable interventions can create broader harm if the standards and decision-making processes are opaque, ad hoc, or unpredictable. Moreover, when the Executive Branch exercises authority delegated from Congress, such as in the conduct of export control administration, it is essential that it keep Congress fully apprised of its actions and procedures.”

The senators concluded the letter with a list of areas of clarification that will bring transparency to the public processes and standards the administration uses to deem frontier AI models a national security risk, the legal authorities the administration relies on to restrict access to AI models, and the administration’s assessment of whether its oversight strategy could incentive adoption of Chinese or other non-U.S. AI models.

“We support serious, technically informed action to prevent frontier AI from being misused by adversaries or criminals and to mitigate risks posed by misalignment in the models themselves. The United States cannot afford to create a policy environment in which the most advanced American AI systems are subject to opaque, case-by-case restrictions while Chinese alternatives appear cheaper, easier to access, and more predictable to deploy. A clear public framework is necessary to protect national security, preserve U.S. AI leadership, and give industry and allies confidence that the United States remains the safest and most reliable source of advanced AI technology. We hope you will work with Congress to pursue such a framework,” the senators wrote.

The full text of the letter can be found here.

###


Grassley Leads Iowa Delegation in Call for Expedited Disaster Aid in Four Iowa Counties Following July Floods

WASHINGTON – Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), along with Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-Iowa), Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa), Zach Nunn (R-Iowa) and Randy Feenstra (R-Iowa) today called on President Donald Trump to approve Governor Kim Reynolds’ disaster declaration request following severe weather and heavy rainfall between July 1-4, 2026.

The weather produced high winds, severe flash flooding, and massive overtopping across central Iowa’s river basin, causing significant damage to public infrastructure and private property.

In addition to requesting hazard mitigation statewide, Governor Reynolds is seeking funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Public Assistance program to rebuild damaged public infrastructure and public facilities and to cover costs for emergency clean-up efforts.

The FEMA Public Assistance program was requested for Jasper, Polk, Story and Warren counties.

Read the delegation’s full letter to the president HERE.

SBA’s Disaster Loan Program:

On July 24, Governor Reynolds announced the Small Business Administration granted her request to provide assistance for eight counties impacted by the severe storms: Boone, Dallas, Jasper, Madison, Marion, Polk, Story and Warren counties. Learn more HERE.

Disaster loan applications can be submitted online at lending.sba.gov or in person at designated assistance centers.


Senate Judiciary Committee Advances Todd Blanche’s Nomination to be Attorney General

WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee today advanced Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination to be U.S. Attorney General, by a vote of 12-10.

“Todd Blanche’s Justice Department has reprioritized the safety of Americans after the Biden administration opened the borders to violent criminals and turned a blind eye to the heinous crimes that were happening around the country… Today, I’m not only voting to advance Todd Blanche’s nomination. I’m voting for the safety of the American people,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said.

Blanche’s nomination is supported by over 670,000 law enforcement officers, 300 Angel Families and more than 100 bipartisan U.S. Attorneys and DOJ officials spanning eight administrations. Under his leadership at the Department of Justice, the United States’ homicide rate has fallen to its lowest level in over 125 years, and every major violent crime category has dropped below pre-pandemic levels.

Watch the executive business meeting HERE. Read Grassley’s opening statement HERE.


Senate Unanimously Passes Grassley-Durbin Bankruptcy Legislation to Support Small Businesses and American Families

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) are applauding the Senate’s unanimous passage of their Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act of 2026 to restore Americans’ access to critical bankruptcy programs by reinstating modern debt limits for Subchapter V and Chapter 13.

“Our nation’s bankruptcy code should work for Americans, not against them. By eliminating barriers to reorganization and restoring modern debt limits, the bipartisan Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act would provide American families and small businesses the tools they need to regain their financial footing in a quicker, more streamlined process,” Grassley said. “I thank my colleagues in the Senate for their unanimous support of our legislation, and I urge the House of Representatives to swiftly pass this needed legislation.”

“Bankruptcy is often a painful last resort for small business owners. This bill makes permanent a quicker and cheaper pathway for entrepreneurs to settle debts, keep the lights on, and keep serving their neighbors. It also expands eligibility for Chapter 13 bankruptcy to help more families manage rising costs, stay in their homes, and get back on their feet. With unanimous passage in the Senate, I encourage the House of Representatives to quickly pass this bill—and for the President to sign it into law,” Durbin said.

The bipartisan legislation is cosponsored by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Chris Coons (D-Del.) and the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Bill text can be found HERE.

Background:

The Grassley-Whitehouse Small Business Reorganization Act, signed into law in 2019, established Subchapter V within Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Subchapter V streamlined the Chapter 11 bankruptcy process for small business owners by reducing procedural burdens and lowering filing costs. Legislation signed into law in 2020 allowed more small businesses to qualify for these streamlined procedures by increasing the upper debt limit for Subchapter V to $7.5 million.

In 2022, the Grassley-Whitehouse Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment and Technical Corrections Act was signed into law, extending the $7.5 million debt limit for small businesses filing under Subchapter V and establishing a new debt limit of $2.75 million for individuals and families filing under Chapter 13. However, when the Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment and Technical Corrections Act expired in 2024, the debt thresholds for both programs reverted to lower levels.

The Grassley-Durbin Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act of 2026 would permanently restore the Subchapter V debt limit to $7.5 million and the Chapter 13 debt limit to $2.75 million.


ICYMI—Hagerty JoinsMornings With Maria on Fox Business to Discuss SAVE America Act, Clarity Act and Arctic Frost Investigation

Washington—Today, United States Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., a member of the Senate Foreign Relations, Appropriations, and Banking Committees, joined Mornings With Maria on Fox Business to discuss the week ahead in the Senate, including the SAVE America Act, the Clarity Act and the Arctic Frost Investigation.

*Click the photo above or here to watch*

Partial Transcript

Hagerty on the SAVE America Act: I just got back from Tennessee over the past weekend, and Americans want to see us pass this act. They want election integrity, and this is not a partisan issue. Every American—this is an 80% plus issue—they want to see it get done. I think we’re going to have to find a way to do it. I understand the reluctance of some of my colleagues because this budget reconciliation process opens up an unlimited amendment process where the [Senate Democrats] will have us voting against Santa Claus, against Christmas, against apple pie—you name it. [Senate Republicans] are going to have to lock our arms and stand strong, take the tough votes, and get our way through this. But I think it would be very, very challenging for us to go back to our constituents and tell them that we didn’t give it our very best to get this done.

Hagerty on the Arctic Frost Investigation: I want to find out what happened. It’s unbelievable. I’ve been a Verizon customer for decades. What happened was Verizon decided to violate the Constitution. I’m a sitting United States Senator, but because I’m a Republican—I presume—they were more than willing to cooperate with [Former President Joe Biden] and [Special Counsel Jack Smith] in the midst of an unconstitutional search of our records. AT&T blocked it; they wouldn’t do it because they knew it was against the Constitution. Verizon decided to move right ahead with it. Their chief executive officer and their chief legal officer have dodged every question. Even the chief legal officer decided to skip her hearing on this topic. We need to put both of them under oath and ask them some tough questions… Verizon was looking at a $20 billion acquisition of [Frontier Communications]. That was in the pipeline. Did they feel like they had to engender some sort of favor with the [Biden administration Department of Justice (DOJ)] so they’d get that approved? … Corporate America has got to realize that they’re going to be held to account when they engage in this sort of partisan political activity at the expense of their customers.

Hagerty on Verizon and the weaponization of the Biden Department of Justice (DOJ): It’s hard to say what [Special Counsel Jack Smith] was looking for, but he wanted a massive witch hunt. And it seemed that it only turned on whether you’re Republican or not. And it may only turn on whether you’re an ally or a friend of this current sitting president. Again, his enemy clearly was [President Donald Trump]. Those of us that were his allies were the ones that he felt like he had an open hunting license to go out and pursue anything and everything that he might to try to turn on us, to try to make our lives uncomfortable. And the fact that you had a company like Verizon colluding with Jack Smith, colluding with the Biden DOJ, and handing over Republicans’ records. Again, let’s find out why. Was it to curry favor? Was it to get a $20 billion acquisition through? Was it to get an appointment for the chief legal officer in the Biden administration?

Hagerty on holding Verizon accountable: We don’t know the answers to these questions. That’s why we need to put them under oath. That’s why they need to stop obfuscating. I made a formal complaint to them. They have until Aug. 11 to answer these questions, let’s see if they do… They’ve done everything they can to dodge and obfuscate. So we’re going to keep pressing. And now that I’ve got [Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-IA,] and [Sen. Ron Johnson, R-WI,] on my side to press this, we have the full weight of the [Senate Judiciary Committee]. I think we have oversight powers now. We’ll bring them in; we’ll haul them in.

Hagerty on the CLARITY Act: We’re going to have to pass the CLARITY Act. There’s no way that we can allow the United States to fall behind in the digital assets arena. Everything is moving digital around the world. The GENIUS Act was a major step forward to make certain that the digital dollar remains dominant in the world. But we need to follow it up with the remainder of the market. I think the problem is, will we be able to pass this with Democrats right now? Or are they going to let midterm politics get in the way? I think we should just put it to a vote on the floor of the United States Senate and find out where the Democrats stand.


Hawley Urges Secretary Rollins to Keep Farm Service Agency Offices Open in Missouri

WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) called on United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke Rollins to address Farm Service Agency (FSA) office closures and reduction of services in Missouri. His letter comes after the Missouri FSA State Committee announced a reduction of services in Ralls County starting in October of this year, a crucial time for farmers receiving conservation and disaster program assistance.

Senator Hawley thanked Secretary Rollins for her efforts safeguarding Missouri agriculture, writing, “I appreciate your efforts to assist farmers as they continue to face high input costs and yearly financial losses. As you know, our nation’s producers rely on timely services from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) field offices as they work to navigate these challenges.”

He continued, “I write to request your review of pending closures and the reduction of services at Missouri Farm Service Agency (FSA) offices. In particular, I am concerned about the pending reduction of services at the Ralls County FSA office on October 1, 2026. October is an incredibly important time of the year at FSA offices as several conservation and disaster program payments are distributed.”

The Senator concluded, “I urge you to use all appropriate resources and authorities at your disposal to preserve the continued operation of FSA offices in my state.”

Read the full letter here or below.

August 4, 2026

The Honorable Brooke L. Rollins

Secretary of Agriculture

United States Department of Agriculture

1400 Independence Ave. S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20250

Dear Secretary Rollins,

I appreciate your efforts to assist farmers as they continue to face high input costs and yearly financial losses. As you know, our nation’s producers rely on timely services from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) field offices as they work to navigate these challenges.

For this reason, I write to request your review of pending closures and the reduction of services at Missouri Farm Service Agency (FSA) offices. In particular, I am concerned about the pending reduction of services at the Ralls County FSA office on October 1, 2026. October is an incredibly important time of the year at FSA offices as several conservation and disaster program payments are distributed.

To assist my review of these matters, I respectfully request the following information by August 14, 2026:

How many Missouri FSA offices has USDA proposed to close by October 1, 2027? Please provide the names of each county office.

How many Missouri FSA has USDA proposed to reduce services at or alter to “appointment only” availability by October 1, 2027? Please provide the names of each county office.

What staffing plans has the USDA considered to add quality FSA employees?

If additional staff is obtained prior to October, will the USDA reverse course on current plans to close or reduce services at Missouri FSA offices?

I urge you to use all appropriate resources and authorities at your disposal to preserve the continued operation of FSA offices in my state. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,


ICYMI: Ranking Member Heinrich and Energy Secretary Granholm Interview with Heatmap News on Energy Costs, Permitting Reform, and AI Data Centers

WASHINGTON – During an interview with Heatmap News’ Robinson Meyer, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, was joined by former U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm to discuss President Trump’s actions that are skyrocketing gas and energy costs on families and small businesses, permitting reform, Heinrich’s Grid Connection and Congestion Management Act, AI data centers, and lessons learned from the Inflation Reduction Act.

“This is an administration that has chosen to take actions that have negatively impacted prices in so many different sectors. And I hear about that at the grocery store, at the gas station, wherever I go. Energy prices are going up across the board,” said Heinrich.

“What Democrats should always keep in their minds is that you cannot create and manage the energy transition on the backs of consumers,” continued Heinrich. “They already have their plates full. They're doing everything they can to make our economy work. We can't ask them to do more, especially in this environment. That doesn't mean we quit managing that transition, and it just means we can't ask consumers to pay for it.”

U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, answers questions on energy costs, permitting reform, AI data centers, and the Inflation Reduction Act, August 3, 2026.

On President Trump’s War with Iran and High Gas Prices

Meyer asked, “Yesterday, Defense Secretary, as it were, announced that the cost of Iran was $37 billion, and we've already seen fuel prices go up. I know you wanted to start the conversation by talking about the huge spikes in energy costs that your constituents have seen, and I just wanted to ask at the beginning, you know, what are you hearing here? Because it does seem to me that at this point, there was an initial spike after the war, went back down, and now they're steadily climbing up again, and so you know, obviously New Mexico is also a producing state. But what are you hearing?”

Heinrich answered, “Just that people are feeling the pinch on energy prices everywhere, and it's across all forms of energy. This is an administration that has chosen to take actions that have negatively impacted prices in so many different sectors. So, you know what they're doing in the electricity sector by not permitting all this new generation that is just waiting to be connected to the grid – that's raising electricity prices. You have the war in Iran, which has constrained international oil and gas supplies, and that is raising both natural gas, gasoline, and also diesel costs. And that diesel cost is really important because the reality is, once you run up the cost of diesel, then you see that every place that things move, you see it immediately in the grocery store because it costs more to move food from one part of the country to the other. You see it in building supply prices. What they're doing, making old coal plants that are ready to shut down stay on the grid, that actually costs money, and those costs are being passed on to consumers in those places. No matter where you look in the energy map, what they're doing is increasing costs. And I hear about that at the grocery store, at the gas station, wherever I go. Really, it's like energy prices are going up across the board.”

Meyer turned to Granholm, “Secretary Granholm, I'm curious. You know, at this point, we've had about a year and a half of watching the new Department of Energy in action... but I want to start by asking what has stood out to you about how it's operating, what you don't like, and maybe one thing you like, if there's anything.”

Granholm answered, “I will say, you know, there was a big diaspora of the team, an incredibly smart team that had to leave, or that chose to leave because of some of the things they're describing. I will say I'm going to give you a silver lining on some of this because I really do think that the actions of this administration unintentionally caused a rush to clean energy and other solutions. So the old triple B, the One Big Beautiful Bill, didn't take away the tax credits. It used to be solar plus storage. Solar plus storage. Now it's solar plus storage, and you know it's great that those tax credits still exist, and you're seeing developers really take advantage of it. Putting a cliff on when those tax credits, when the solar tax credits and land tax credits expired, obviously caused a rush for developers to build up, so the amount of gigawatts that are being added to the grid, I mean, it’s so ironic. At the end of 2024, when we added almost 60 gigawatts of clean power to the grid and batteries, we thought that was going to be the top because of what the administration knew. But the unintended consequences of this action is that this huge rate of gigawatts, added to the grid of clean power and batteries. Amazing, amazing. So I'm glad that some of that foundation is still existing. The private sector even understands the importance of this move, and I will say because of the war, you know, it only accelerates the move toward non-fossil fuel, people with local powers, energy sovereignty, and that means clean power.”

Heinrich followed, “And we've seen other economies accelerate those shifts, seeing what's going on in the Strait of Hormuz, and in some cases, in China's case, really anticipating it, moving large portions of their economy from molecules to electricity.”

Meyer asked, “Do you have any theories? I'm injecting this, but do you have any theories for why? I feel like after the Strait of Hormuz closed, there were doomsday predictions about where oil would go, and obviously oil prices increased significantly, but they didn't hit $150 or $22 a barrel. Do you have any theories about why that is?”

Heinrich answered, “It's a couple of things. There's more buffer in the system than we used to have. China built up big reserves ahead of time. There are the commercial reserves. There's the strategic petroleum reserve. We haven't exhausted those buffers, so that really has worked to mitigate. You know, prices are bad. It's just not as bad as some of the predictions are. We're not at the bottom now because the Strait’s closed again, and those commercial reserves are now, after a little bump when the MOU happened and was announced, they're ticking back down, and there is a point at which the system stops working like it's designed to work. You need a certain amount of oil in the system, and we're getting closer to that than I think any of us. And then you're one hurricane away from really bad prices.”

On Permitting Reform and the Grid Connection and Congestion Management Act

Meyer asked, “So obviously, one way to lower prices, or one potential way to lower prices over the long term, is permitting reform. I know you're in negotiations right now about a deal here. So can you give us an update on where that stands?”

Heinrich answered, “I don't want to get in the weeds on it because the negotiations are actually very active right now, but I do think there's a path there, and I think both Republican and Democratic leaders in the relevant committees want to get to yes on permitting. I think the biggest wild card is actually the White House because the White House continues to do things that sort of poison the well. They did that with the Historic Preservation Act new regulations this week. They've done that with stop-work orders on offshore wind, with the Department of Defense stopping the process of processing very straightforward onshore wind permitting projects on public lands. Time and time again, they have entered this debate in ways that have not been healthy, that haven't been helpful for getting a product across the line. We're working hard. We're trying to negotiate, you know, a middle ground, but I worry about the impact of the White House.”

Granholm followed, “The utter frustration about waiting for Congress, you know, present company exempted, to get permitting reform done suggests that there may be another path, and you know I know that there is an effort on the part of hyperscalers or AI companies to look at how can AI do this instead of waiting for Congress. So, for example, I think you probably covered this: the effort that Google has, through tapestry at PJM, the notion that you should be able to take the interconnection queue and move it more quickly because you can do concurrent studies, et cetera, rather than all these consecutive wait in line blah blah blah, and if you can do that there, or if you can do it with permitting and respect the intent of NEPA or the National Historic Preservation Act, and use AI to get some of this done and accelerate, then you might end up leapfrogging over Congress, which doesn't mean that you shouldn't be doing it. But I just worry that...”

Heinrich interjected, “I do think that the interconnection queues are a perfect place to apply machine learning, AI, advanced modeling, and we had all five FERC commissioners in front of us today on the Energy Natural Resources Committee. And one of the commissioners walked through an example where they were able to do, historically, what had been an over 600-day analysis of adding this generation to the grid became a 10-day process, and so we should absolutely do all that. I still think we're going to need to reform permitting and be able to get to yes or no faster and make sure that those permits flow.”

Granholm followed, “Your mouth to God's ears.”

Meyer stated, “I do wonder, with the AI acceleration of permitting, it seems like there are a lot of places to speed things up. It also seems like it's only so long until we are already used to these massive dockets and huge studies for a lot of energy projects or infrastructure projects. It does seem like AI only increases the ability to expand those dockets and make every study bigger and allow more people to file more documents that then have to be reviewed. It just seems like a both ways thing, but maybe...”

Granholm followed, “But hopefully, at least you can truncate the amount of time that is. It should not take 10 years for a transmission, or 17 in your case, it's insane.”

Heinrich followed, “There's only so much capital in that world, and so many competent developers I think it will generate additional demand, but the advantage of being able to do modeling quickly is really, it seems like, a very unlinear advantage. I think we're going to see a lot of, of juice for the squeeze from that.”

Granholm followed, “I love what you have introduced, though, the [Grid] Connect[ion] and [Congestion] Manage[ment] Act. Can I ask him this question? You probably have that on your list, but I mean, describe what that is because it's so smart to be able to jump the queue essentially if you agree to certain conditions.”

Heinrich answered, “I mean, we've always been modeling based on what's the worst-case scenario, what's the worst hour of the worst month when in the middle of July everybody's coming home and turning on their air conditioning at the same time. There are vast stretches of time when the grid just has a lot more capacity, and so what our bill says is, if you will commit to curtail power when the grid is full, you can just plug into the grid, and we'll let you sell power whenever the grid still has excess capacity, but you're going to have to dial it down when it doesn't have that capacity, and so that's something that we've seen work in ERCOT, and I think has huge potential for getting a lot more generation on the grid quickly if we apply that nationally.”

Meyer asked, “Do you anticipate a law like that or some kind of policy like that being in the permitting reform field this year, or is that a future policy you'd like to see?”

Heinrich answered, “We’ll have the conversation. We're rolling this out obviously late in the game, and I'm a big believer in get what you can done in any given Congress. Don't wait for the next Congress and think it's all going to be perfect. It never is around here, so we'll get everything we can done in this Congress. That's my position, and if that's not part of the mix, then of course we're going... permitting reform is not going to go away.”

Meyer pressed, “And then one more on this, just because I have a news responsibility, which is, where do we like? What would a timeline look like? I once heard the timeline was, you'd want to see text by August recess, but that's pretty soon.”

Heinrich answered, “We're very thick in the negotiations right now, and whether or not we could land something before August, I'm not going to speculate. But my goal has always been just to get something out of this Congress. I don't care when that happens, but I'd like to get a product out of this Congress.”

On the Implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act and Energy Costs

Meyer asked, “Secretary Granholm, I wonder what, watching now 18 months of the Trump administration, you think, you know ‘we should have done this differently when during the Biden administration,’ or ‘there's an issue here that I would have handled differently,’ or now that I see what's happened and how they've approached governing.”

Granholm answered, “Yeah, it's such a, it's a great question because I think every one of the cabinet officials looks at what has happened in the Trump administration and says, ‘Man, I should have broken more eggs, not more laws, but I should have like really insisted on much more quicker,’ you know, all the negotiations that took forever on, you know, getting the Treasury guidelines and all of that. It was like a cannonball should have dropped through, and I think that's a good lesson that will be taken away for the next administration.”

Meyer pressed, “And why didn't it happen?”

Granholm answered, “Because there's process, because there's lawyers. I mean, there was a sense that this is the way you do things, et cetera.”

Heinrich interjected, “And we accepted that status quo.”

Granholm continued, “Yeah, we all accepted it.”

Heinrich interjected, “And we shouldn’t have. We should have built programs that don't take two years of analysis, and that is definitely the lesson that I took from the rapid... the things that were fairly straightforward, like the tax credits, were able to move quickly. But there were whole programs like the green bank that got stood up just in time to be turned off.”

Meyer asked, “Is that a drafting failure or an implementation failure?”

Granholm answered, “I mean, to be fair, there was a lot in implementation, but there are a lot of rules around all of this that have certain timelines, et cetera. So I think taking a look at all of that. I mean, Democrats have been very-we're going to follow the rules, and we're not going to bust. You know, we're not going to break norms. And I think this administration has broken a lot of norms and shown that you can get stuff done more quickly. Not likely they've been done quickly, but nonetheless, I think it's a lesson for us about challenging the status quo.”

Meyer asked, “On energy costs. I want to just observe a kind of interesting dynamic here, which is that I think as Trump has taken steps that have driven up energy costs, I think we all agree it's making costs higher than they would be otherwise. Certainly, the Iran War, likely the permitting obstacles that they put up to wind and solar, tariffs. He has driven up. I think his administration has driven up energy costs, and we hear a lot from Democrats about how that's bad. It does seem a little bit to me like there's a bit of an effort to play both sides because I think when right now Trump is doing things that are driving up costs and costs are going up and everyone agrees that's bad. Democrats get in office and they have a lot of different goals for the energy system. Some are procedural and some are about environmental goals, and that tends to slow things down. People take a long time to approve, say, oil and gas permits. And so, do you think that watching this experience, you know, watching the Trump administration, the Democrats are now ready to embrace or looking at, let's say, an affordability-first or affordability-only agenda, where it's like we'll take clean, we'll take fossil, we'll take whatever, as long as costs are low.”

Heinrich answered, “I think what Democrats should always keep in their minds is that you cannot create and manage the energy transition on the backs of consumers. They already have their plates full. They're doing everything they can to make our economy work. We can't ask them to do more, especially in this environment. That doesn't mean we quit managing that transition; it just means we can't ask consumers to pay for it.”

Granholm answered, “But if we're to be honest, the cheapest energy is clean energy, and so if you want to go cheap, then let abundant clean energy be prolific and deployed throughout the land, and it will bring the rates down.”

Meyer pressed, “Let me just push back a little and say I think watching, let's say, the Trump administration revoke permits and block permits and block construction for wind and solar, it does put you in mind of the Keystone XL pipeline, which was not necessarily an affordability project, but which Democrats did block. Now, it was, there were good climate reasons to block it…”

Heinrich interjected, “But it was also an export project, and the reality is exports raise costs. They just do. You can export a certain amount of natural gas, and that can be okay, but when you hit a certain threshold, you're going to start to see natural gas prices increase, and that's why we built into those exports the fact that the Secretary of Energy is supposed to sign off on a project by project basis. It wasn't meant to be infinite, because if you do make it infinite, eventually exports, by virtue of those exports, you're actually going to raise domestic prices for both consumers and for manufacturers, and they've taken the opposite approach, which is let's export as much as we can. At a certain point, you see that have an impact on the costs and on the jobs that those manufacturers create, right?”

Granholm followed, “Right. The studies that have been shown, I mean, it's the question of supply and demand, right? If, in fact, the capacity fills everything that's been authorized, you will have double the amount of exports of natural gas. Even though we have such an abundant supply of natural gas in this country, that is going to put upward pressure on prices.”

Heinrich interjected, “It connects us to the international price market, and we've seen this this before in places like Australia. We don't want to be connected to that because those prices are much higher. There's more advantage in having moderate prices here that can that can really incentivize good jobs in things like manufacturing.”

On AI Data Centers

Meyer asked, “Secretary Granholm, I wonder, we've seen this explosion — I feel like, just dated almost to when the Biden-Trump transition happened in AI data centers and in electricity demand — I know you're working, you're thinking about these issues right now. So, I guess take us to the end of your time in government versus what's happened since then. And was this scale of demand forecasted?”

Granholm answered, “No, no. I mean, even, I mean, you guys noticed, noted that Bloomberg New Energy Finance increased their projection, their forecast, for how many gigawatts are going to be necessary to feed the beast by 2035, and just from December of last year, of you know 2025 to now, it has increased by 80 percent. I mean, it's just, it's voracious the appetite for power. So it is really quite astonishing. Now, will all of that come to fruition? Will the chips be more efficient? Are these going to be sited because of the NIMBY issues? All of those are legitimate questions. But if the demand projections are accurate, it is going to require a massive amount of buildout of power.”

Meyer asked, “What's the right way to make sure as much of that power is as green as possible? Because I think right now it's going to be met by gas. Now maybe that's...”

Granholm answered, “Maybe, or maybe not. I mean, is that the smart way to go? When I mean, you know, it's mind-blowing to me a little bit that there's all this assumption that it's all going to be natural gas, when first of all you have to have the infrastructure for natural gas, or you have to build it out. It takes a lot of time to build out that infrastructure. Secondly, the wait for natural gas turbines, as everybody knows, is years. So the time frame of getting natural gas turbines and a natural gas plant is long, whereas the time frame for getting solar and batteries you can get within months, say, rather than years, so I don't necessarily buy the fact. Maybe natural gas ends up being a backup power. Maybe the, you know, bloom energy, et cetera, ends up being your backup source. But even that, when you look at the technology associated with long duration energy storage and how that is really coming to bear, I mean, there's, you know, example after example of that, or you know, geothermal, enhanced geothermal. There's any number of solutions that end up being clean and don't incur the wrath of citizens as much as fossil fuel solutions.”

Heinrich answered, “It’s worth considering, too, that if we do see the level, the scale of natural gas generation that some people are proposing, it will markedly increase the cost of gas for other uses. So, if your house electricity is generated by natural gas, those prices are going to go up. If you heat your house with natural gas directly, those prices are going to go up. If you're a manufacturer and you're using gas, those prices are going to go up. So it is in our interest to find cheaper, cleaner sources of power to power as much of this transition as we can possibly get.”

Meyer asked, “How do you balance making the big investments that the power system needs or the energy system needs to meet future energy demand, which is going to come from data centers or electrification or manufacturing. Even if you curtain off data centers and be like, ‘This is a bad energy use. We're going to need a lot more energy in the future to do a lot of the things we want to do.’ How do you balance the long-term need to make big investments in the energy system or the power system to meet future demand versus the need to keep costs low in the short term because right now the way we pay for future big investments is to raise costs today?”

Granholm answered, “Right, rate base. What if these data centers that come on are required to pay for those infrastructure upgrades, which you know everybody's talking about. The president has pledged that he's having people sign. Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan has pledged. I mean, everybody's talking about... In fact, you guys, meaning Congress, just passed out of the E&C Committee, a ratepayer pledge. Great. Let's get a pledge that the hyperscalers pay for the upgrades that they bring clean power that they have responsible, if not replenishment water use, using advanced technologies to be able to do that. You know, maybe you take down some of the opposition, but maybe you also make the grid stronger as well. Maybe these data centers become grid assets because they are supplying power back to the grid, or they have created additional battery usage to make the grid more reliable, or they inject power when the grid is at maximum capacity. But more than that, those are kind of table stakes for data centers. What if they brought more than that? What if, you know, in community benefit agreements. What is the stake that the community has, and what do they give to the community? And to me, this is where the most interesting part of this conversation can happen. Not only should they pay for all those upgrades, but maybe they also pay for distributed energy resources, for home solar and storage, or maybe they help to subsidize EV batteries, etc., EV vehicles — and use the batteries to create a virtual power plant for a portion of their capacity needs to get that flexibility. Now the community has a stake. They get a battery in their home, or they get a heat pump, or whatever... It’s interesting, Volltus has done this with the PJM market. They're going to bid 100 megawatts of distributed capacity into the PJM capacity auction. How great is that? Because they're going to cobble together enough to create a virtual power plant. Why aren't we looking at that? Why aren't we looking at using the grid more efficiently with the resources we have? What Voltus is doing is taking existing assets and cobbling them together to create a virtual power plant. What if hyperscalers pay for new stuff in a community that they're coming into? So I think there's a real opportunity here.”

Heinrich followed, “I think given the premium that a lot of these developers have been willing to pay – you can reduce price pressure on consumers, and you can invest in more infrastructure.”

Meyer asked, “What does this look like in policy? Because I think there's a lot of good ideas. There's a lot of goals. Obviously, the Trump administration has advanced their ratepayer protection pledge, which is kind of all of this stuff, but without emphasizing clean as much or at all. There's still a ton of demand to build data centers. What's the policy to focus that demand look like, and what goals should Democrats bring to the, you know, the process of regulating and shaping the data center building?”

Granholm answered, “There may be a sort of floor that the federal government puts into place and then states take it to the next level. So maybe the ratepayer protection pledge, maybe the table stakes, as I call it, are happening at the federal level, and they're required to meet those. And I think many of the responsible tech companies are willing to do that. And then the states go and follow behind. Maybe they require buffer zones. Maybe they require community consultation, and they have a menu of options that a hyperscaler might be able to bring to make not just a community home, but make a community better than when the hyperscaler got here. Politically, this is hard because there's such an aversion, and people can't imagine that this is enforceable and that you trust them that they're going to be transparent. The transparency issue is a real big deal. If I were running for office right now, I'd say no data centers in my state unless you do these five things, and if those five things are done, then we'll have a conversation.”

Meyer asked, “What did you think of? Sorry, say your five things. Say your five things.”

Granholm answered, “No, which is what Gretchen Whitmer did in Michigan, and she's asking the legislature to codify that, or the Public Service Commission in Michigan to do that. That's what needs to happen.”

Meyer asked, “What did you? I interrupted you. You should say the five things.”

Granholm continued, “Well, so making sure that you don't socialize the cost to the rate base. Bring your own clean energy. You have a long-term commitment, so there's an exit fee if you if you go early. You have responsible water use. You are flexible. You agree to flexibility within the system, just as a startup, but you must enter into a community benefit agreement, and that community benefit agreement has to be in consultation with the community in question, and it might include jobs, it might include job training and apprenticeships, and there's a whole menu of things that might be possible that I think hyperscalers would be willing to look at.”

Meyer asked, “Are you worried, if you were to do this, that a lot of data center developers look at that and they go ‘thank you, that's tough, we're going to take this to Texas to build this?’”

Granholm responded, “Local communities, no matter where they are, I mean, there's been over 100 moratoria passed, local communities in red states and in blue states... my message to these local folks is you have leverage. You have leverage right now.”

Heinrich interjected, “You've got to be transparent. You've got to bring real value, which is what the Secretary is talking about, to the community from day one, and build trust.”

Granholm continued, “Raise the bar for all of them, because there's some data center companies who might not be eager to do this, but if you raise the bar as a community and insist on it, maybe they'll go to a place, another place, but maybe, just maybe, that other place is going to be insistent on using its leverage as well.”

Lessons from the Inflation Reduction Act

Meyer asked, “Last question. So, the IRA, it was a big bill, and you both played a major role in it, implementation or writing or passage. It tried to electrify a lot of the economy, and obviously, it did a lot of good. Maybe it wasn't going to meet its targets, had everything remained in the case, but it’s impossible to know what would happen with a Harris administration. It was trying to electrify more of the economy and create this big surge of electricity. Now we have the data center boom, huge, huge demand for electricity, and a ton of electricity infrastructure is getting built out now, on the back of the demand boom. What are the lessons from the IRA that we should take? I mean, in your head, maybe you both experienced the IRA. You both experienced, I would say, the IRA era of governance. So, what should we learn from that and apply to the data center growth...”

Granholm asked, “To the data centers?”

Meyer clarified, “Or to the next few years, yeah.”

Granholm answered, “I would like to see a revising of the Inflation Reduction Act. I mean, a rebirth of the pieces that were carved out, so tax credits for solar and for wind, et cetera. I'd like to see an investment tax credit for the grid as well. But I think the lesson in terms of implementation was pretty clear that we just didn't do a good job of selling it. It took too long, so we did a lot of ribbon cuttings, but we didn't do a lot of groundbreakings. Or excuse me, we did a lot of groundbreakings, but we didn't do a lot of ribbon cuttings, meaning, people weren't hired yet for all of these announcements that were made, and so people didn't feel it on the ground, and so they didn't attribute it to the administration from a political point of view, or certainly to the Inflation Reduction Act, which people, everyday citizens, have no idea what that was. So, doing a much better job in getting the word out about why is this factory opening up in my area, why am I hearing about a job fair over here? And connecting those dots, I think, was one of the big areas.”

Heinrich answered, “Speed number one, and then doing a better job of telling the story. I think that's where we lost the narrative. We had a great story to tell. I really focused, and it was an election year for me, so I focused heavily on the specific factories that were making solar and wind components for these big projects in New Mexico, and I tied it to big construction projects like the SunZia generation and transmission line. I don't think we did that nationally as effectively as we could have.”

Meyer asked, “Do you think it needs a big, charismatic idea at the center next time, National Grid or Big Underground? We're going to underground all the lines, or something, or would just selling it have been better?”

Granholm answered, “When I tell people that there were 950 factories that came or announced they were coming or expanding in the United States just to build clean energy stuff as a result of the Inflation Reduction Act, people are like 950 factories coming? I mean, there was a good story there. There really was, and you know, I was on, you know, the main cable networks, but I didn't go on all of the side, you know. And most people aren't getting their news from main cable, so we have to think better strategically about how we communicate, where we communicate, use social media a lot more to be able to get the word out.”


In Judiciary Committee, Hirono Votes Against Advancing Blanche Confirmation

~ Watch Senator Hirono’s Statement Here ~

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) a senior member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, voted against advancing Todd Blanche’s nomination to serve as the United States Attorney General. In a Judiciary Committee executive business meeting, Senator Hirono raised concerns about Mr. Blanche’s ability to lead an independent U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) committed to enforcing the rule of law.

“Mr. Blanche has demonstrated that his words to us at his hearing do not matter. I intend to judge Mr. Blanche not by his words but by his actions. Even though he said he would cooperate with the New Mexico Epstein investigation, he will not actually do so. Even though he claims to follow the constitution and the law, he acts as the President’s lawyer, catering to his whims,” said Senator Hirono. “At a time when DOJ has lost thousands of career attorneys with millennia of combined experience, and when DOJ’s independence from politics is no longer in existence, I cannot vote in favor of someone whose actions so clearly make him ineligible to serve as Attorney General—even of a department as compromised as this Department of Justice, which is basically the Department of Retribution and Revenge.”

Since the beginning of President Trump’s second term, Senator Hirono has been fighting back against the Trump Administration’s flagrant attacks on the rule of law. Last month, during Mr. Blanche’s nomination hearing, Senator Hirono pressed Blanche on his role in weaponizing the DOJ against President Trump’s perceived enemies, his failure to rescind the anti-weaponization slush fund, and his commitment to assisting the state of New Mexico’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch. In March, on the Senate Floor, Senator Hirono opposed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act which, unlike its name suggests, would make it significantly harder for Americans to exercise their right to vote. Additionally, Senator Hirono has consistently raised alarms about the Administration’s failure to adequately address cryptocurrency related crimes. Senator Hirono has also consistently sought justice for sexual assault survivors, including those assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein and President Trump.

Watch the video of Senator Hirono’s statement here. A full transcript of Senator Hirono’s statement is available below:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I asked Mr. Blanche questions in three broad areas during his hearing two weeks ago.

First, I asked him about the Epstein files. Specifically, I asked whether he would cooperate with the New Mexico Department of Justice’s investigation into Epstein’s Zorro Ranch. And I asked if he would help state law enforcement get the information that it was seeking from the Epstein files.

At the hearing, he said DOJ would cooperate. But in follow-up questions for the record, he dodged. And I understand that DOJ is actually stonewalling the New Mexico Department of Justice in its request for information in its investigation.

This public show of concern contrasted with private dismissiveness is how he treated the survivors who met with him, the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein.

I asked one of those survivors about the meeting that he finally had with the survivors.

She said, “We walked away with a feeling of demoralization because he did not come into that meeting looking to work with us in good faith.”

I thank and commend the survivors for their courage in fighting for justice.

The second category of questions I asked Mr. Blanche two weeks ago centered on DOJ’s independence. I asked him the simple question, “Do you believe it is the President’s ‘right’ and ‘duty’ to order the investigation or prosecution of his perceived enemies?”

Mr. Blanche responded, “I can’t answer that yes or no.” He might as well just have said yes.

In follow-up questions for the record, I asked him the simple question, “If confirmed, will your highest duty be to the Constitution of the United States or to the President of the United States?”

He left the answer to that question blank. Blank. When he is sworn in as Attorney General, he will swear to uphold and defend the Constitution, but we know that oath will take a back seat to his loyalty to the President.

The third category of questions I asked him was related to the slush fund. At his hearing, I asked him whether he had rescinded the Order dated May 18, 2026, setting out parameters for the anti-weaponization fund. He testified that he had rescinded it.

In questions for the record, I asked him on what date he had rescinded the order and this fund. He did not answer the question with a date.

He refused to end this felon fund in writing until he was forced into it in order to secure needed votes from my Republican colleagues. And how can we trust that this so-called “death” will be lasting when he has shown that his words to us at his hearing do not matter? He was under oath at the hearing, but he’s hardly going to prosecute himself for lying to Congress, which he did.

Mr. Chairman, I intend to judge Mr. Blanche not by his words but by his actions.

Even though he said he would cooperate with the New Mexico Epstein investigation, it seems he will not actually do so. Even though he claims to follow the constitution and the law, he acts as the President’s lawyer, catering to his whims and protecting him.

And even though he said repeatedly that the anti-weaponization fund is dead, he had to be forced literally kicking and screaming to memorialize that death in written.

That non-binding writing will mean little when the President wants the fund and is loudly saying so. Who do you think Mr. Blanche will side with?

Is he going to uphold this so-called non-binding statement made to secure today’s vote from some of my Republican colleagues? Or the wishes of the President to whom he is loyal above all?

At a time when DOJ has lost thousands of career attorneys with millennia of combined experience, and when DOJ’s independence from politics is no longer in existence I cannot vote in favor of someone whose actions so clearly make him ineligible to serve as Attorney General—even of a department as compromised as this Department of Justice, which basically is a Department of Retribution and Revenge.

And I urge my colleagues to vote no as well.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

###


Husted-backed bill to crack down on foreign robocalls passes Senate

“I’ve heard from too many Ohioans who have been targeted by foreign scammers and robocalls, and it’s clear we need stronger tools to stop them.”

WASHINGTON – Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio) today announced the Senate has passed the Foreign Robocall Elimination Act, a bill he co-sponsored to strengthen efforts to stop foreign scam calls.

“I’ve heard from too many Ohioans who have been targeted by foreign scammers and robocalls, and it’s clear we need stronger tools to stop them. This bill would improve coordination, strengthen enforcement and ensure there are real consequences for those who prey on innocent Americans. I’m encouraged to see this bill pass the Senate, and I’ll continue working to get it through the House and signed into law,” said Husted.

The Foreign Robocall Elimination Act would create a task force responsible for developing a strategy to combat foreign robocalls. It would also extend the renewal period for the critical Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) program, which works to track down the culprits of these scam calls.

This bill would bring together government and private sector experts to work with the Department of Justice to ensure that they are properly equipped to address and prosecute illicit robocalls.

This task force would evaluate foreign robocalls and determine the most effective strategies to combat them, with the goal of enhancing international cooperation to reduce illegal robocalls.

This support came after Husted has consistently heard from Ohioans about the impact that robocalls have on their daily lives.

The Foreign Robocall Elimination Act passed the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on Oct. 21, 2025.

The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) and USTelecom endorse the bill.


Husted leads bill to help Ohioans afford their first home

“By freeing up existing resources, I’m proud this bipartisan bill gives first-time homebuyers another tool to use in pursuing their version of the American Dream.”

WASHINGTON – Sens. Jon Husted (R-Ohio) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) today introduced the First-Time Homebuyer Empowerment Act. This bill would help first-time homebuyers by allowing them to put unused college savings toward a down payment.

The First-Time Homebuyer Empowerment Act would allow people to transfer up to $35,000 in leftover college savings from their 529 plans tax free for the purchase of a first home. Funds in 529 plans traditionally may only be used for education-related expenses or transferred to a retirement account. By freeing up existing resources for first-time homebuyers, the bill would remove barriers to making a down payment and help more families afford a home.

“I’m focused on helping working families get ahead and making life more affordable. Making homeownership more attainable is a critical part of that effort. Too many Ohioans have worked hard, saved responsibly and still struggle to afford a down payment. By freeing up existing resources, I’m proud this bipartisan bill gives first-time homebuyers another tool to use in pursuing their version of the American Dream,” said Husted.

“Across Colorado, too many young people and working families struggle to afford their first home. This bill would allow first-time homebuyers to use the savings they already have to cover a down payment and help put homeownership within reach,” said Bennet.

“Downpayment hurdles continue to block many families from owning a home. The First-Time Home Buyer Empowerment Act provides a common-sense solution that empowers first-time buyers to use their own savings—at no cost to taxpayers. MBA looks forward to supporting this and other efforts in Congress to expand sustainable homeownership,” said Bill Killmer, Senior Vice President of Legislative & Political Affairs at Mortgage Bankers Association.

Reps. Tom Barrett (R-Mich.), Tracey Mann (R-Kan.), Mark Alford (R-Mo.) and Lou Correa (D-Calif.) introduced the companion bill to the First-Time Homebuyer Empowerment Act in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“Homeownership is the heart of the American Dream. The ability to provide a safe, stable place to raise a family is so important for the future of our country. Today, too many young Americans feel that owning a home is becoming more and more out of reach. I appreciate Senator Husted and Senator Bennet introducing companion legislation to our House bill. By working together in bipartisan and bicameral fashion, we can give people more flexibility on how to use their savings, opening up pathways for more Americans to own equity in their homes,” said Mann.

“Every American deserves a fair shot at owning a home. Too many first-time buyers are working hard and saving yet still can’t reach the down payment. This commonsense bill gives families more flexibility to use their existing savings in tax advantaged accounts, opening the door to the American Dream,” said Alford.

“This bill would give hard-working American taxpayers on Main Street greater flexibility to put the money they’ve earnestly saved toward one of the largest investments they can make—buying a home. In Orange County and across our state, housing has only become more unaffordable. This would mark an important step toward giving aspiring home-owners across the country the tools they need to build and sustain financial stability—for themselves and their children,” said Correa.

“Too many families can’t afford homes that work for them, plain and simple. An easy first step towards changing that reality is to let homebuyers tap into unused college savings in their 529 accounts and put them towards purchasing their first home. I’m proud to join my colleagues on this legislation to incentivize saving for the future and help the next generation achieve homeownership,” said Barrett.

This bill builds on Husted’s work to help more Americans buy a home by reducing the cost of housing. Husted supported the 21stCentury ROAD to Housing Act which focuses on the root cause of rising housing costs by cutting red tape, unlocking housing supply, lowering costs for families, protecting taxpayers and preserving local control.


Kaine, Van Hollen, Colleagues Urge Trump Administration to Prevent Further Atrocities in Sudan

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined a group of his colleagues led by Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) in pressing the State Department to use its leverage to prevent further atrocities in Sudan and help bring the war to an end. In a letter to U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio, the senators stressed the immediate need for the State Department to act in light of the impending siege of the city of El Obeid and following the atrocities that occurred in El Fasher last year.

“We write with alarm regarding the Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) impending siege of the city of El Obeid in Sudan, which threatens a repeat of the mass atrocities and bloodshed that occurred in El Fasher this past October. While we welcome the State Department’s expression of concern about the escalating situation in El Obeid, words are not enough. The United States must use the leverage and influence at our disposal to prevent further atrocities in El Obeid and help bring this brutal war in Sudan to an end. These actions should include ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to external actors that are fueling this war, including the United Arab Emirates, which continues to arm the RSF,” wrote the senators.

“We have already witnessed what happens when the international community fails to heed warnings of RSF atrocities. The RSF’s siege and devastation of El Fasher bore the ‘hallmarks of genocide’ according to United Nations investigators. […] The siege of El Fasher lasted for over 500 days, and the ensuing atrocities were widely foreseen and repeatedly forewarned by the United Nations, intelligence from the U.S. State Department and foreign governments, humanitarian monitors, and researchers. We remain greatly concerned by this administration’s grave failure to act despite the chorus of alarm bells. What occurred in El Fasher is a stark warning of what could unfold in El Obeid and across Sudan if this administration—and the international community—continues this current pattern of inaction,” the senators continued.

“The State Department has also recognized that this is a critical moment. On June 22, the State Department spokesperson warned of ‘alarming indications that mass atrocities could be imminent’ and said ‘the RSF and their allied forces must cease any actions that could endanger civilians, impede humanitarian assistance, or contribute to further atrocities and suffering,’” the senators emphasized.

“Now, an estimated 500,000 civilians are at risk in El Obeid, including many who have sought shelter there after fleeing RSF attacks across the Kordofan region. The encirclement and systematic crippling of resources in El Obeid increasingly parallels El Fasher, and this administration must use its leverage and influence to prevent a repeat of El Fasher’s horrors in El Obeid before it is too late. We urge this administration to take concrete actions to prevent such mass atrocities in El Obeid, including by ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to the UAE and other external actors that are fueling this war. We also request an update on what other actions the administration is taking, beyond just words, to prevent mass atrocities in El Obeid and to help bring this war to an end,” they concluded.

In addition to Kaine and Van Hollen, the letter was signed by Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD).

Full text of the letter is available here and below:

Secretary Rubio,

We write with alarm regarding the Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) impending siege of the city of El Obeid in Sudan, which threatens a repeat of the mass atrocities and bloodshed that occurred in El Fasher this past October. While we welcome the State Department’s expression of concern about the escalating situation in El Obeid, words are not enough. The United States must use the leverage and influence at our disposal to prevent further atrocities in El Obeid and help bring this brutal war in Sudan to an end. These actions should include ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to external actors that are fueling this war, including the United Arab Emirates, which continues to arm the RSF.

We have already witnessed what happens when the international community fails to heed warnings of RSF atrocities. The RSF’s siege and devastation of El Fasher bore the “hallmarks of genocide” according to United Nations investigators. A United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission found that “the Rapid Support Forces steadily squeezed the life out of El-Fasher and surrounding displacement camps, cutting off food, water, medical supplies, and humanitarian assistance, while subjecting the city to recurring shelling and ground assaults. Civilians were increasingly trapped, as escape routes were restricted or closed, and forced to endure conditions of life progressively incompatible with human survival.” This 18-month siege culminated in a 3-day rampage in October 2025, where survivors describe the slaughter of civilians, mass executions, and crimes against humanity.

El-Fasher University “became one of the bloodiest execution sites in the city.” According to survivors, over a hundred civilians were gunned down or executed as they sought shelter or attempted to flee. Survivors described notorious RSF commander Abu Lulu, known as the “Butcher of El-Fasher", asking a pregnant woman how far she was in her pregnancy and then firing seven bullets into her abdomen when she replied that she was seven months along. He at one point said, “I was planning to kill 2000 people today, but I lost count, so I will start all over again.” In the case of El-Saudi Hospital, RSF forces stormed the hospital and “proceeded to search the wards and killing those they found, including patients, accompanying persons and medical personnel...it is estimated that over 460 patients and others present were killed.” Flight didn’t bring safety, according to survivors, as “The Rapid Support Forces pursued fleeing civilians along escape routes...where they had established ambushes and checkpoints...the perpetrators chasing people in open fields, firing at them with automatic rifles and mounted submachine guns, and running over fleeing persons with vehicles, causing mass casualties.” The horrors were visible from space, with satellite images analyzed by the Yale Humanitarian Research Lab showing bodies piled up in the streets, pools of blood on the ground, and mass burial sites.

The siege of El Fasher lasted for over 500 days, and the ensuing atrocities were widely foreseen and repeatedly forewarned by the United Nations, intelligence from the U.S. State Department and foreign governments, humanitarian monitors, and researchers. We remain greatly concerned by this administration’s grave failure to act despite the chorus of alarm bells. What occurred in El Fasher is a stark warning of what could unfold in El Obeid and across Sudan if this administration—and the international community—continues this current pattern of inaction.

And now those alarm bells are ringing once again – this time in El Obeid. Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on July 3, "This is not a drill. It is a red alert that needs to land on the desks of heads of state and government around the world. Their phones should be running hot in the coming days and weeks, with ideas on how to prevent atrocity crimes in El Obeid and in other places in Kordofan.” Tom Fletcher, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, said of El Obeid on June 30, “Too often in this brutal war, clear warnings have been ignored. Civilians have paid the price. The international community must make itself heard. We cannot say we were not warned.”

The State Department has also recognized that this is a critical moment. On June 22, the State Department spokesperson warned of “alarming indications that mass atrocities could be imminent” and said “the RSF and their allied forces must cease any actions that could endanger civilians, impede humanitarian assistance, or contribute to further atrocities and suffering.” On June 23, State Department Senior Advisor for Africa Massad Boulos said that he spoke with RSF leadership and “strongly urged them to halt any actions that could endanger civilians in and around El Obeid.” And this Administration has repeatedly affirmed, including in July 2025, that “The Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and allied militias have committed genocide.” In November 2025, you yourself said that the RSF is “clearly receiving assistance from outside” and that “something needs to be done to cut off the weapons and the support the RSF is getting as they continue their advances.”

The evidence is clear – the United Arab Emirates is the primary external backer of the RSF, providing unparalleled military, financial, and technical support to the group. In May 2026, a new report by Human Rights Watch found that the UAE trained hundreds of Colombian mercenaries who then “took part in combat in and around El Fasher and, according to media reports, provided training to RSF recruits–including child soldiers”. In February 2026, a Reuters investigation found that Ethiopia has built a secret camp to train thousands of RSF fighters, and that the UAE financed the construction of the camp and provided military trainers and logistical support. This follows U.S. intelligence from October 2025, including separate reports from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department’s intelligence bureau, that “show an increase in the flow of materiel from the U.A.E. to the rebel Rapid Support Forces since the spring.” These findings are part of a large and growing body of credible evidence that the UAE is both arming and providing military support to the RSF.

Now, an estimated 500,000 civilians are at risk in El Obeid, including many who have sought shelter there after fleeing RSF attacks across the Kordofan region. The encirclement and systematic crippling of resources in El Obeid increasingly parallels El Fasher, and this administration must use its leverage and influence to prevent a repeat of El Fasher’s horrors in El Obeid before it is too late. We urge this administration to take concrete actions to prevent such mass atrocities in El Obeid, including by ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to the UAE and other external actors that are fueling this war. We also request an update on what other actions the administration is taking, beyond just words, to prevent mass atrocities in El Obeid and to help bring this war to an end.

We request a response to this letter by August 17, 2026.

Sincerely,


IN THE NEWS: Kelly’s Bills to Get More Men into Teaching, Mentorship, and Service Gain National Attention

Last month, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly introduced the Educators for America Act and the Building Community in America Actto expand pathways for Americans to serve as teachers, mentors, and volunteers. The bills strengthen paid teacher training and national service opportunities, with a focus on recruiting men.

Since their introduction, the bills have received broad support from local and national leaders. The pair of bills have also received national recognition on the news and social media

See coverage highlights below:

Raging Moderates, Podcast: Sen. Mark Kelly joins Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov

Kelly has new bipartisan legislation aimed at getting more men into education as teachers, mentors, and volunteers — and makes the case that Democrats need to spend more time on legislation like this rather than national political fights.

Richard V. Reeves, Twitter: Major development for men and boys on the national level thanks to @SenMarkKelly. Great to see momentum on this.

[…] “It’s a really historic day when we have a senator introducing, for the first time, bills that specifically look at the under representation of men in such crucial professions. So, huge kudos to Senator Mark Kelly for leading this effort.” […]

Of Boys and Men, Substack: Two federal bills on boys and men. Two!

This is a good day. A very good day.

It has become increasingly clear in recent years that the lack of men in our classrooms and community institutions is a problem — for the organizations and professions; for men themselves; and above all for our kids.

As far as I can tell, no bill has ever been introduced in the U.S. Congress with the explicit goal of getting more men into K-12 teaching, or into mentoring, coaching, and community service.

Until today. […]

[…] What I really like about Kelly’s education bill is that it targets the pipeline — and specifically an important side door. The front door into teaching is an undergraduate education degree, and that route is now overwhelmingly female: only 17% of education BAs go to men. AIBM’s work shows that men are much more likely to come to teaching later, as a career change, via alternative routes — the engineer who becomes a math teacher at 35, the veteran, the coach. Some may come into teaching from college but without an education degree.

Teacher residencies, modeled on medical residencies, let candidates earn a salary while they train in a real classroom, with no prior education degree required. Kelly’s bill requires the federally funded residency programs under the Teacher Quality Partnership to make a proactive effort to recruit men. […]

[…] These are historic bills. For the first time ever, increasing the share of men in our classrooms and service organizations is the central and explicit goal of bills at the federal level. The permission space to acknowledge and act on the challenges of boys and men has widened significantly, and we are now seeing policymakers at all levels of government take up the cause. And take it up in a positive, non zero-sum way. […]

Telemundo [Video] : Buscan aumentar cantidad de maestros y mentores hombres para la juventud

El senador Mark Kelly habla sobre la importancia de hombres que sirvan como ejemplo para los niños.

Univison Arizona [Video] : El senador Mark Kelly impulsa proyectos de ley para aumentar la presencia de maestros y mentores

El senador por Arizona, Mark Kelly, presenta los proyectos de ley Educators for America Act y The Building Community in America Act para enfrentar el aislamiento de los jóvenes. Durante su visita a Univision Arizona, el senador destacó la disminución de maestros en las aulas, que cayó del 35% al 23% en los últimos años. Las propuestas buscan destinar financiamiento a la capacitación de docentes masculinos y fomentar programas de mentoría que guíen el desarrollo juvenil.

Male Educators, Instagram: Sen. Mark Kelly introduces new legislation on educators and mentors

Sen. Mark Kelly has introduced new legislation aimed at getting more men into classrooms. Kelly points to the same trend we’ve been tracking: just 23% of public school teachers are men today, down sharply from when he was in school.

His Educators for America Act would expand recruitment pipelines, strengthen training and mentorship support for new teachers, and address retention, the same barriers our research on male teachers has consistently pointed to as reasons men leave the profession or never enter it in the first place.

“At a time when our boys need them the most, less and less men are volunteering. In our schools, the share of male educators has been consistently declining as males continue to fall further and further behind their female classmates. So Senator Kelly’s bills are right on time. The bills also go hand in hand because service can be a pathway into teaching for so many men. We can fix what’s wrong in our communities with what’s right: men ready to serve,” notes MEN President Curtis Valentine. […]

Katie Couric, Podcast: Senator Mark Kelly discusses why he thinks more men should become teachers and mentors

Katie Couric: How are you going to get more men to do these kinds of things? These

leadership roles?

Senator Kelly: That’s what the legislation does. There are two pieces of legislation. One creates paid teacher training programs. Often, if somebody wants to become a teacher, they have to do all of that on their own, and there’s a cost involved.

So, and you’re going into a field that, you know traditionally doesn’t pay as much as it should. Teachers, in my view, are woefully underpaid. So this would pay them to do the training

to get more men in the classroom.

When we were younger, about 35% of teachers were men. Today that number is 23 %, so it’s going down not helpful for young men.

The other legislation prioritizes men to go into programs like AmeriCorps. The waiting list for male mentors is a lot longer than for female mentors. Women are just more resilient at a

young age.

Scripps News: Sen. Mark Kelly wants more men in classrooms through new legislation

Sen. Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat, is promoting new bipartisan legislation aimed at addressing the nationwide teacher shortage by improving educator recruitment, training and retention.

Kelly said he wants to attract a broader range of teachers, including more men. He highlighted the gender gap in education, noting that only 23% of public school teachers are men and that male representation in teaching was significantly higher when he was younger. […]

KTAR: Sen. Mark Kelly proposes 2 bills to support young men and grow public service

[…] Teachers said their students had voiced concerns about not having strong male role models in their lives and that other groups were focused on in media while young men might feel left out.

Emmett Burnton, who teaches at Boulder Creek High School in the Deer Valley Unified School District, is the 2025 Arizona Teacher of the Year. He said as a history teacher, he sees this firsthand.

“I was asking them like if they were in a room just like this in history … who would you want to sit with? Who would be your people? And they were crying, literally 16-year-old boys, because they’re like I don’t know who I am. … They couldn’t relate to any historical figure,” he said. […]


Senator King Introduces Bipartisan Bill to Fight Mosquito-Borne Diseases

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME) is introducing bipartisan legislation to strengthen the fight against mosquito and other vector-borne diseases (VBD). The Strengthening Mosquito Abatement for Safety and Health (SMASH) 2.0 Act would reauthorize funding for federal mosquito control and public health response efforts as well as improve preparedness and response efforts for VBDs.

Vector-borne diseases (VBDs) is the technical term for diseases spread by insects like mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas. For decades, the United States government has successfully controlled VBDs through methods like eliminating standing water breeding grounds and deploying safe pesticides to eliminate the seasonal scourges of malaria and yellow fever.

“One of the best parts about living in Maine is being able to spend time outdoors, but the threat of dangerous illnesses from mosquito bites is a real concern,” said Senator King. “Mosquitoes are more than just a nuisance – they have the potential to transmit dangerous diseases which threaten American public health Acting to prevent the spread of such diseases is essential to protect the health of Maine people and Americans nationwide. The SMASH 2.0 Act would provide our communities with further protection from vector-borne diseases and their complications, promoting health and reducing healthcare costs.”

More specifically, the SMASH 2.0 Act would:

Reauthorize the CDC’s Mosquito Abatement for Safety and Health (MASH) program at $100 million per year;

Authorize within the MASH program to expand training, evaluation, and to support education and training for public health staff engaged in mosquito abatement; and

Require the CDC to coordinate with the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) on stockpiling vector-borne disease control products.

“Mosquitoes and the diseases they transmit are continual threats to all Americans,” said American Mosquito Control Association (AMCA) Technical Advisor Daniel Markowski. “The reauthorization of the SMASH Act is imperative to support the ability of local districts, state health departments, territorial governments, and tribal communities to identify and combat the continued threat of vector-borne diseases from mosquitoes. The AMCA strongly supports this legislation as it will provide local programs with resources for timely, on-the-ground prevention and control.”

“Strengthening the capacity of local and state health departments to detect and respond to outbreaks promptly through vector surveillance, laboratory testing, and integrated disease management programs is necessary to effectively slow the transmission of mosquito-borne diseases and limit their spread to promote the health and safety of the public. The SMASH 2.0 Act is one critical way to help accomplish this and the Entomological Society of America enthusiastically encourages Congress to pass this legislation,” said Dr. Melissa Siebert, the 2026 President of the Entomological Society of America.

Joining Senator King on this legislation are U.S. Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Rick Scott (R-FL).

“The West Nile virus does not consign itself to far-off lands. Mississippians are infected with it every year,” said Senator Wicker (R-MS). “This bill will help us track and treat West Nile Virus in our communities.”

“Minnesotans are proud to boast about our 10,000 lakes and thousands of rivers for us to enjoy, and we’re always eager to get outside after a long winter. The only downside to having so many bodies of water to enjoy are the mosquitos that come with them,” said Senator Smith (D-MN). “The number of vector-borne disease cases in Minnesota and across the country is on the rise. This bill will strengthen education, preparedness, and response efforts for these diseases, ensuring that Americans can continue to safely enjoy the outdoors.

“Florida’s world-famous weather brings millions of visitors to beaches and parks across the Sunshine State every year. I am proud to partner with my colleagues to ensure those beautiful outdoor spaces are protected against mosquito-borne illnesses. State and local governments need to be properly prepared to combat the spread of these diseases, and this bill goes a long way to ensure those tools are available to them,” said Senator Scott (R-FL).

Senator King has long been an active proponent for research intended to combat vector-borne diseases. In 2025, Senator King introduced the Kay Hagan Tick Act, landmark legislation to improve research, prevention, diagnostics, and treatment for tick-borne diseases. Senator King also introduced the SMASH Act in 2019, a predecessor to the SMASH 2.0 Act that authorized funding for mosquito control and VBD prevention efforts in response to the spread of Zika in the years prior. The SMASH Act was signed into law in 2019.

###